Rio Tinto loses appeal on worker agreements
Mining giant Rio Tinto has lost a bid to appeal to the High Court over an employment agreement with its Pilbara iron ore workers.
More than 5,000 people work at Rio Tinto’s Pilbara iron ore operation.
The company was hoping to appeal an earlier Federal Court ruling that an employment agreement covering the workforce was not a genuine collective agreement.
Professor Andrew Stewart from the University of Adelaide says the company was trying to tie up as many workers as possible under agreements that precluded union collective bargaining.
“The union successfully argued that that agreement was invalid, the High Court refused to hear an appeal against that, and that means that it’s open to those workers and their union to seek a collective agreement in the future,” he said.
Andrew Vickers, the general secretary of the CFMEU’s mining division, says the union welcomes the decision.
“While it puts to rest the fallacy perpetrated by Rio Tinto and their lawyers that they put in place a valid non-union agreement with a small group of workers in their Pilbara iron operations and then extended that agreement effectively to all employees,” he said.
Senior management at Rio Tinto have told employees the High Court decision is disappointing.
‘Blow for Rio’
Professor Stewart says it is a victory for unionised collective bargaining in the mining industry.
“It’s a blow for Rio, and BHP had a similar agreement for its iron ore division,” he said.
“It makes it harder to shut unions out of that particular part of the mining industry.
“But in the end that battle is going to depend on whether or not workers do or don’t want to join unions and are or aren’t persuaded about the merits of collective bargaining.”
Associate Professor Bradon Ellem from the University of Sydney’s business school is keen to see how this High Court decision will affect the relationship between the big mining companies and their employees in the Pilbara.
“It opens the possibility for union collective agreements across Rio Tinto’s Pilbara iron ore operations, but it by no means guarantees it,” he said.
“What will happen now most likely, in a way, a continuation of what’s been happening in the north-west for a very long time and that is a battle for hearts and minds between the company on one side and the union-oriented workers on the other.
“How things play out will be determined by which particular unions engage in what sort of strategies, what sort of grievances workers feel.
“High wages are only one part of the equation and there are some workers who do have many concerns about aspects of work and life in this part of the country. Whether unions can plug into that or whether the company can assuage their fears and keep them onside is going to be very, very interesting to trace – not just over the next few months but I suspect over the next few years.”
By Samantha Donovan
More than 5,000 people work at Rio Tinto’s Pilbara iron ore operation.
The company was hoping to appeal an earlier Federal Court ruling that an employment agreement covering the workforce was not a genuine collective agreement.
Professor Andrew Stewart from the University of Adelaide says the company was trying to tie up as many workers as possible under agreements that precluded union collective bargaining.
“The union successfully argued that that agreement was invalid, the High Court refused to hear an appeal against that, and that means that it’s open to those workers and their union to seek a collective agreement in the future,” he said.
Andrew Vickers, the general secretary of the CFMEU’s mining division, says the union welcomes the decision.
“While it puts to rest the fallacy perpetrated by Rio Tinto and their lawyers that they put in place a valid non-union agreement with a small group of workers in their Pilbara iron operations and then extended that agreement effectively to all employees,” he said.
Senior management at Rio Tinto have told employees the High Court decision is disappointing.
‘Blow for Rio’
Professor Stewart says it is a victory for unionised collective bargaining in the mining industry.
“It’s a blow for Rio, and BHP had a similar agreement for its iron ore division,” he said.
“It makes it harder to shut unions out of that particular part of the mining industry.
“But in the end that battle is going to depend on whether or not workers do or don’t want to join unions and are or aren’t persuaded about the merits of collective bargaining.”
Associate Professor Bradon Ellem from the University of Sydney’s business school is keen to see how this High Court decision will affect the relationship between the big mining companies and their employees in the Pilbara.
“It opens the possibility for union collective agreements across Rio Tinto’s Pilbara iron ore operations, but it by no means guarantees it,” he said.
“What will happen now most likely, in a way, a continuation of what’s been happening in the north-west for a very long time and that is a battle for hearts and minds between the company on one side and the union-oriented workers on the other.
“How things play out will be determined by which particular unions engage in what sort of strategies, what sort of grievances workers feel.
“High wages are only one part of the equation and there are some workers who do have many concerns about aspects of work and life in this part of the country. Whether unions can plug into that or whether the company can assuage their fears and keep them onside is going to be very, very interesting to trace – not just over the next few months but I suspect over the next few years.”
By Samantha Donovan
Comments
Post a Comment