Director of the Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (No 2)

In this case, the Director of the Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate initiated proceedings against the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union and one of its officers for multiple contraventions of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). The union and the officer were found to have engaged in coercive activities targeting Red & Blue Scaffolding (Aust) Pty Ltd, including threats to put the company out of business and obstructing it from entering construction sites, with the intent to compel the company to employ a specific individual, Robert Cannon. The primary legal issues before the court involved determining the appropriate penalties for the contraventions and whether the penalties should be personally imposed on the officer or paid by the union.

The court considered the nature and severity of the contraventions, along with the relationship between them, in determining the penalties. It was found that the coercive actions were interconnected and part of a broader scheme to influence Red & Blue Scaffolding's employment decisions. The court emphasised that penalties should be sufficient to deter future contraventions and reflect the seriousness of the conduct. Given the officer's role and the gravity of the actions, the court decided that the penalties should be personally imposed on him to a lesser extent, while the union was held responsible for the majority of the penalties. This approach was deemed appropriate to ensure accountability at both individual and organisational levels.

The court imposed penalties on the union and the officer, ordering the union to pay significant fines for each contravention, with the officer responsible for a smaller portion of these fines. The union was also ordered to pay interest and compensation to Red & Blue Scaffolding. The penalties were structured to be paid to the Commonwealth, with conditions for the union's penalties being stayed upon payment of specified amounts. The court's decision underscored the importance of enforcing industrial laws to protect businesses from coercive practices and ensuring that penalties are effectively deterrent.