Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union v State of Victoria (No 2)
Citation: [2013] FCA 1034
At a glance
- Penalty
- $53,000
What happened
The Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) brought claims against the State of Victoria and McCorkell Constructions Pty Ltd. The CFMEU alleged that the State took adverse action against Lend Lease employees by threatening to refuse their services due to their enterprise agreement. They also claimed McCorkell refused Eco’s services for similar reasons, and the State intended to coerce Eco and its employees regarding their agreement. Earlier decisions found both the State and McCorkell had contravened parts of the Fair Work Act.
What was decided
The Federal Court considered whether penalties could be imposed on the State and McCorkell. The CFMEU initially sought penalties but later withdrew its request for a penalty against McCorkell, citing economic pressure from the State. The court agreed to not impose a penalty on McCorkell due to this withdrawal. Regarding the State, the court found it *is* amenable to pecuniary penalties under the Fair Work Act and ordered the State pay $25,000 in one case and $28,000 in another. These orders are stayed pending appeal.
What it means for employers
Employers, particularly government entities, should be aware of potential liability for taking adverse action against employees or companies due to their enterprise agreements. The court's willingness to impose penalties on the State highlights that even public bodies can face financial consequences for Fair Work Act breaches. Employers should ensure compliance with workplace laws and avoid actions intended to coerce employees.
What it means for employees
Employees covered by enterprise agreements have protections against adverse action taken by employers or other parties due to their agreement entitlements. The CFMEU’s success in this case demonstrates that legal avenues exist for challenging such actions, potentially leading to penalties for those responsible.
Want this applied to your situation?
Reading the decision is free. FairWork Mate goes further — it reads the full case library and applies precedents like this one to your specific facts, citing the cases as it reasons. General information, not a guaranteed outcome or legal advice.
Every statement above is drawn from the published decision. Read the original here:
https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2013/2013fca1034Want more cases like this?
FairWork Mate tracks Fair Work Ombudsman, Fair Work Commission and Federal Court decisions across Australia. The AI advisor answers plain-English questions grounded on the full corpus — awards cited, industry, penalty amounts and affected employee counts — with a citation to the underlying decision on every answer.
Individual case summaries on this site are free. Full-corpus advisor access is a paid product — Business Solo from $99/mo, 50% off your first 3 months for the first 100 signups.
Get notified on new Fair Work cases
Free email alerts when we publish new underpayment decisions, penalty orders, and workplace law updates.
Free forever. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
This summary was drafted from the published decision and reviewed before publishing. It is general information, not legal advice. For your specific situation, speak to the Fair Work Ombudsman (13 13 94) or a qualified lawyer. About these summaries & corrections →