Industrial Relations Commission New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Request By Unions NSW And The Newcastle Trades Hall Council For The Assistance Of The Industrial Relations Commission Of New South Wales Re Thiess Sedgman Joint Venture Bengalla Project [2012] NSWIRComm 32 Hearing dates: 20/4/12 Decision date: 26 April 2012 Jurisdiction: Industrial Relations Commission Before: Harrison DP Decision: Catchwords: Coal Industry Expansion Project - section 146B disputes procedure - project completion ahead of schedule, on budget, no lost time due to industrial matters. Successful proactive industrial relations, mutual respect and communication. Legislation Cited: Industrial Relations Act 1996 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Unions NSW Newcastle Trades Hall Council Thiess Sedgman Representation: Mr P McPherson Unions NSW and Newcastle Trades Hall Council Mr P Meyer, Project Manager, Thiess Sedgman File Number(s): IRC 1469 of 2010 DECISION 1The notification in this matter arose pursuant to a request by Unions NSW and Newcastle Trades Hall Council (NTHC) for the assistance of the Commission during the construction of the Bengalla Coal Mine, a Thiess Sedgman Joint Venture Project ("the Project"). 2Industrial regulation on the site was in accordance with the Thiess Sedgman Joint Venture Bengalla CHPP Upgrade Project Union Collective Greenfield Agreement 2010 (AE883117 PR505369) ("the Agreement"). Clause 30, Settlement of Disputes nominated the Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales (IRC) as the dispute resolution provider in exercise of functions and process for Project communication and consultation. Pursuant to the Agreement the parties sought the assistance of the Commission to conduct a site inspection and conference. 3The Walz Construction Company Pty Ltd Bengalla CHPP Upgrade Project Greenfields Agreement 2011 (AE885044 PR508287) also applied to the site, nominating the IRC as the dispute resolution provider. 4Commissioner Stanton conducted an inspection and conference on 29 March 2011. 5The Commission as presently constituted undertook inspection and conference on 5 July 2011 and a Statement subsequently issued. 6Further conference took place on 20 April 2012. Mr McPherson appeared on behalf of Unions NSW and NTHC. Mr P Meyer, Project Manager, appeared on behalf of Thiess Sedgman with Mr J Kosanovic, Construction Manager. 7The Thiess Sedgman Joint Venture is a combination of Sedgman, with over 30 years experience in CHPP design, and the 76 years of experience of Thiess in construction and project management. 8The Project is now successfully completed 41 days ahead of schedule and within budget. 9The Project involved the expansion of the Coal Handling Preparation Plant (CHPP) to 10.7 million tonnes per annum capacity; and associated works, including the addition of a second module and Run of Mine (ROM) upgrade. 10The Project value was to the order of $84 million, of which some $38 million was on site construction work. 11The Project adopted critical success factors in the following terms: Workplace free of incidents and injuries Delivered on time Achieve plant performance guarantees No unscheduled interruptions to the existing operations Demonstrate good project execution - including communication with and to all stakeholders Minimise CHPP shutdown durations 12The Thiess Sedgman Joint Venture has adopted a commendable leadership philosophy and employee relations strategies: TSJV Commitments & Leadership Philosophy Our commitment is to: - Provide a workplace free of incidents and injuries - Demonstrate leadership - Ensure legislative compliance - Integrate risk management in all phases of the project - Communicate appropriately with all stakeholders - Train and develop the workforce - Manage fatigue and fitness for work requirements - Review subcontractor compliance through regular audits - Manage any grievances or concerns raised in an appropriate timeframe, ensuring industrial harmony on site ER Strategy · EBA - Developed a model agreement · HR/ER Management Plan - Ensure legislative and site culture compliance - Mandatory for all subcontractors engaged on the Project - Review subcontractor compliance through regular audits · Consultation and Communication forums - Communicate appropriately with all stakeholders - Ensure legislative compliance - ROE and FWA requirements 13During the course of inspection and site discussions it was clearly apparent that these standards were routinely applied on site. 14The agreed communication processes were routinely applied, as was a comprehensive safety model commencing with induction assessment, documented training and reporting processes of absenteeism in the following categories: Work Environment/Conditions Systems/Standards/Procedures Tools and Equipment People (Behavioural Category) -Positions -Actions -Protection 15A pre-start meeting record was kept as part of the overall communication process. The Take Five observation and reporting process was actively implemented against a well documented behavioural matrix which identified those areas of responsibility for management, supervisors and everyone on site to achieve continuous improvement of the safety culture. 16Project management adopted a "one team" approach which included a daily pre-start meeting conducted by senior management involving all employees on site in which a selected specific topic was discussed and then reinforced by separate sub-contractor pre-start discussions. 17Lead and lag indicators of progress were advised in the following terms: Lead Indicators Project Total JHA (job hazard action) completed: 5184 Safety Interactions 4418 Safety audits 14 Alcohol tests23277 Drug tests 306 Hazards Reported during inspections 156 HSE Improvements 28 Safety meetings 56 Site Inspections 710 Lag IndicatorsProject Total Site hours worked237542 Lost time injury (LTI) 1 Medical treatment case2 Restricted work injury1 First aid case14 Property Damage12 Near miss19 Fire2 Travel3 18It was reported that the Project was characterised by good working relationships and communication between contractor/client, sub-contractors, employees and the unions. 19There was no lost time due to industrial issues, all of which were resolved by the parties as they were identified within the communication process. 20A further feature of the Project was the need to provide industry training as many employees had not worked on major construction projects prior to engagement. 21In the close-out conference held on 20 April 2012 the parties confirmed that the effort and investment in safety processes, communication and training had been totally justified in the Project outcome which achieved the required plant performance guarantee of processing 200,000 tonnes of raw coal within two weeks of start up with 98% availability, no unscheduled interruptions to the existing operations, and minimised coal handling plant shutdown durations during the course of the Project. 22This is a commendable achievement and is a credit to all those involved in the Project. The outcomes are even more creditable when consideration is given to the difficulty of working within and around the ongoing operations which involved complex and tight logistical access with the impact of unseasonable wet weather. 23It is evident that the parties have used their industrial agreement as the foundation of mutual respect and communication in exercise of positive, proactive industrial relations. 24Matter No IRC 1469 of 2010 is so concluded. ****** DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 26 April 2012