1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content

Wilson v Nesbet, Baker and CFMEU


QLD , Backgrounder 

Release date: 12 February 2009 

Allegations in the ABCC’s statement of claim
  • Budget Shopfitters Pty Ltd design, manufacture and install shop-fittings. Their head office is located in Brendale, Queensland.
  • Employees of Budget Shopfitters are engaged under the Budget Shopfitters Pty Ltd Employee Collective Agreement.
  • On 23 June 2008, CFMEU officers Tim Nesbit and Guy Baker visited the Brendale premises. During the visit Mr Nesbit told Budget Shopfitter’s Managing Director, that the Budget Shopfitters enterprise agreement was unlawful. Mr Nesbit stated that Budget
  • Shopfitters should terminate their agreement and make a union agreement.
  • Mr Nesbit told the Managing Director that he must make sure that all Budget Shopfitter’s employees were members of the union.
  • Mr Nesbit made statements to the Managing Director that constituted threats to:
        • Ban Budget Shopfitters from entering any building site in Australia.
        • Perform an audit which would result in Budget Shopfitters having to spend between $50,000 and $150,000 on improvements.
  • It is alleged that Mr Nesbit made these threats with the intent to coerce Budget Shopfitters to terminate their enterprise agreement and make an agreement with the CFMEU.
  • It is alleged that Mr Baker’s presence, tacit support and failure to disagree with the statements made by Mr Nesbit constituted agreement with Mr Nesbit’s behaviour.
Alleged contraventions
  • Mr Nesbit is alleged to have:
    • Contravened s.44(1) of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005
    • (BCII Act) by threatening Budget Shopfitters with the intent to coerce it into terminating its current agreement and making a new agreement with the CFMEU.
    • Contravened s.400(1) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 by threatening Budget Shopfitters with the intent to coerce.
  • Mr Baker is alleged to have:
    • Contravened s.44(1) of the BCII Act by being knowingly concerned in, or a party to Mr Nesbit’s alleged contraventions of the BCII Act.
    • Contravened s.400(1) of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 by being knowingly concerned in, or a party to Mr Nesbit’s alleged contraventions of the WR Act.
  • The CFMEU is alleged to be liable for the conduct of Mr Nesbit and Mr Baker as their officers or agents.
ABCC Prosecution
  • The ABCC filed proceedings in the Federal Court at Brisbane on 27 January 2009. The first directions hearing is on 20 February 2009.
Penalties
  • The maximum penalties for a contravention of s.44(1) of the BCII Act are $22,000 for an individual and $110,000 for a union.
  • The maximum penalties for a contravention of s.400(1) of the WR Act are $6,600 for an individual and $33,000 for a union.