1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content

Paper Australia Pty Ltd and Bilfinger Berger Services Australia Pty Ltd v AWU


Case number: C2007/2842 
Applicant(s): Paper Australia Pty Ltd and Bilfinger Berger Services (Australia) Pty Limited 
Respondent(s): AWU 
Site: Paper Australia mill at Maryvale in Morwell 
Jurisdiction: AIRC 
Before: Senior Deputy President Watson 
Hearing date:
21 and 22 June 2007
Intervention filed on: 21 June 2007 

On 21 June 2007, Paper Australia Pty Ltd and Bilfinger Berger Services (Australia) Pty Ltd applied for an order under s.496 of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 to stop industrial action after having been advised by union delegates that the AWU was to convene a stop work meeting at 11.00am on 21 June, 2007 at the Paper Australia mill at Maryvale in Morwell. Bilfinger Berger is a major maintenance contractor on the site. Paper Australia is in the process of conducting a large-scale maintenance shutdown together with a construction project that will expand the mill’s capacity.

Prior to the hearing at 10.30am on 21 June, the companies had written to the AWU and employees advising that an application for orders was being made to the AIRC and that an unauthorised stoppage should not occur. In the event, no stop work meeting took place and the AIRC proceedings were adjourned until 22 June to allow the parties to have further discussions.

When proceedings resumed in the AIRC on 22 June, the companies amended their application to include industrial action in the form of an overtime ban. The companies claimed that AWU members employed by various contractors were refusing to work overtime in accordance with an agreement between the principal contractor, Transfield, and unions with members engaged on the shutdown project. The shutdown agreement made provision for employees to work 12- hour shifts for the period during which the plant was shut down.

At the conclusion of the hearing SDP Watson announced that Transfield had agreed to authorise a meeting of employees on 23 June 2007 to ratify the agreement on 12 hour shifts for the shutdown. In the event that agreement was ratified, the companies would withdraw their application for orders. If the agreement was rejected the Commission would grant an interim order in line with the companies’ application and a further hearing in the AIRC would take place on Tuesday 26 June.

A meeting of employees on 23 June refused to ratify the agreement on 12 hour shifts. Shortly thereafter, SDP Watson issued an order as indicated the previous day. On 25 June Transfield Services received confirmation from AWU representatives that 12 hour shifts would be worked that day and throughout the remainder of the shutdown period.

In the light of normal work resuming SDP Watson issued a further order on 26 June revoking the interim order he had made with effect from 24 June.