Application by CFMEU - Construction and General Division, Victoria-Tasmania Divisional Branch (105N-VTAS) for an Entry Permit for Maurice Patrick Campanaro
Citation: [2026] FWC 3171
At a glance
- Penalty
- $4,000
- Employees affected
- 1
What happened
The Construction Forestry & Maritime Employees Union (CFMEU) applied for a right of entry permit for its official, Maurice Patrick Campanaro. Campanaro, an organiser, has not previously held a permit. He was previously subject to declarations and ordered to pay a penalty of $4,000 for contravening section 348 of the Fair Work Act in 2016, after preventing a contractor from commencing work until fees were paid to the union. Campanaro has since acknowledged the seriousness of his actions and completed relevant training.
What was decided
The Fair Work Commission (FWC) granted the CFMEU’s application for an entry permit for Maurice Patrick Campanaro. The Commission considered factors including Campanaro’s training, prior convictions, and a previous penalty order. While Campanaro was previously found to have contravened the Fair Work Act, the Commission found that the incident occurred almost a decade ago and that Campanaro has since reflected on his actions. The Commission was satisfied he is a fit and proper person to hold a permit.
What it means for employers
Employers should be aware of the requirements for union entry permits and the factors considered by the FWC when assessing an applicant's suitability. Past conduct, even if acknowledged and regretted, can be a factor in decisions about entry permits.
What it means for employees
Employees should understand the process for union officials seeking entry permits and the criteria used to assess their suitability. Union members should be aware of the training and responsibilities associated with holding an entry permit.
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.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/pdf/2026fwc3171.pdfWant 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. The full FWC and Federal Court library behind every advisor answer is on Pro.
FairWork Mate AI
This is one decision. Pro reads all of them.
Free case pages cite the top 250 decisions. Pro opens the full Fair Work Commission and Federal Court library, cross-references your own situation against it, and cites the decision behind every answer — plus document upload, so it can read your letter or contract line by line. 150 questions a month, cancel anytime.
Just need today sorted? A Day Pass is 25 questions over 24 hours. No account, nothing to cancel.
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