Gregor v Setka
The Federal Magistrates Court in Melbourne has penalised CFMEU assistant secretary John Setka $6,000 out of a maximum $6,600, for threatening a Bovis Lend Lease (BLL) construction manager and general foreman while exercising his rights as a permit holder.
ABC Commissioner Leigh Johns welcomed the decision, saying a penalty of 90% of the maximum was appropriate having regard to the senior position held by Mr Setka and the responsibility on him to lead by example in complying with obligations under Commonwealth workplace laws.
‘The law clearly defines the responsibilities of permit holders and the occupiers of premises, it is crucial that all parties observe these conditions,’ said Commissioner Johns.
‘While Mr Setka was entitled to advance legitimate safety concerns, as a leader in the union movement, he should do so by lawful means. In this instance he made serious threats of some, albeit unspecified, sort of violent retribution against BLL personnel.
‘This behaviour would not be accepted in any other industry, and it should not be accepted in the building and construction industry. From his leadership position in the union movement Mr Setka should repudiate this type of behaviour as some sort of industry norm.
“In seeking to advance the safety interests of his members, Mr Setka threatened the safety of others. There is no irony in this serious episode, it’s simply a case of hypocrisy for which Mr Setka demonstrated no contrition to the court.”
‘Mr Setka’s abusive tirade did nothing to rectify the safety issues on site. Mr Setka would have achieved far more for his members had he simply followed the required right of entry procedures or followed standard dispute resolution procedures.’
The penalties were handed down following the events of 6 March 2008, when Mr Setka and other union officials entered the site of building works at the ANZ Dockland Headquarters in Melbourne, exercising rights under the Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (Vic).
While on the site Mr Setka addressed two BLL employees, saying:
‘This job’s a f**king deathtrap and a disgrace. If you kill anyone on this job I am going to quit my f**king job and get you.
When one of the employees asked if Mr Setka was threatening him, Mr Setka replied:
‘I’m not f**king threatening you, I’m f**king promising, I will get you, and you.
In handing down his decision on penalty, Burchardt FM noted that:
‘Mr Setka is a senior officer of the CFMEU. As a senior officer, he should be setting a better example...
It is also important for the Court to emphasise in its decision to all players in this industry that the robust culture referred to by both parties in their submissions cannot legitimise this sort of conduct.’
Burchardt FM, Paragraph 34 b), Paragraph 41.
The prosecution was commenced under the Workplace Relations Act 1996. The Fair Work Act 2009 provides similar conditions for permit holders and employers.