You web browser may not be properly supported. To use this site and all its features we recommend using the latest versions of Chrome, Safari or Firefox


The Federal Court has dismissed a case brought by Fair Work Building and Construction (FWBC) against a CFMEU official for entering a work site in response to a request from a health and safety representative (HSR) for assistance made under Victorian occupational health and safety legislation.

Slater and Gordon represented Mick Powell, then a CFMEU organiser, in a proceeding brought in the Federal Court by the FWBC (now the ABCC) alleging that Powell had breached s 494 of the Fair Work Act by going on site in response to the HSR’s request without a Federal right of entry permit.

Prior to the FWBC case alleging breaches of the Fair Work Act, Powell had also been arrested and charged with trespass by Victoria Police for going on site. Slater and Gordon also represented Powell in the criminal proceedings.

The criminal prosecution was eventually dropped, but not before it was revealed in a bail hearing that the trespass charge was based on advice from the FWBC to Victoria Police that Powell was on site in breach of the Fair Work Act.

That advice has now been proved to be incorrect, with Justice Bromberg finding in November 2016 that Powell was not exercising a right under a State OHS law by going on site, the relevant right being conferred on the HSR, and that Powell was therefore not required to hold a Federal right of entry permit.

This decision recognises:

  • the important right of HSRs to request a person of their choosing to attend their workplace to assist them in performing their duties under OHS/Work Health and Safety (WHS) legislation.
  • The role of health and safety representatives, who are appointed by workers, is to be a voice of labour in occupational health and safety matters.
  • The importance of that role is recognised through the powers that are conferred on health and safety representatives by State OHS/WHS Acts.

Instead of recognising that role and allowing the OHS/WHS legislation to work the way it’s supposed to, the FWBC, for its own political reasons, has attempted to undermine the important role of HSRs and place restrictions on how they exercise their powers.

At the time Powell was arrested, both the then federal Employment Minister, Eric Abetz, and the Director of the FWBC, Nigel Hadgkiss, had been making public statements criticising Victoria Police for not arresting more CFMEU officials for going on site.

We now know that the FWBC was also giving legal advice to the police to encourage them to arrest CFMEU officials.

As such, not only have the FWBC and the federal Government been caught attempting to use Victoria Police to advance their own political agenda, they have been caught doing so on the basis of incorrect legal advice.

The ABCC has filed an appeal against this decision.

Director of FWBII v Powell [2016] FCA 1281

The contents of this blog post are considered accurate as at the date of publication. However the applicable laws may be subject to change, thereby affecting the accuracy of the article. The information contained in this blog post is of a general nature only and is not specific to anyone’s personal circumstances. Please seek legal advice before acting on any of the information contained in this post.

Thank you for your feedback.

Related blog posts

Employment Law
Injured migrant food delivery workers can’t afford medical costs or time off to recover if inju …

Former Uber Eats rider Bruna Correa had only been in Australia for three months when she was car-doored by a driver getting out of a parked vehicle, while delivering food in Sydney last year. She required two surgeries, four months off work and three months’ worth of physiotherapy. When the driver’s door flung open, she fell off her bike and recalls seeing her arm hit the ground, breaking her wrist before the ambulance came. After realising she would no longer receive income to support herself, she sought legal support to lodge a Compulsory Third Party (CTP) claim. This meant she was supported by weekly payments to cover her lost income through her CTP claim which have now come to an...

Bruna prior to accident cropped
Employment Law
Life after lockdown: what are your rights with returning to work?

COVID-19 has changed many things in our lives. It has made us adapt to new social norms of staying 1.5 meters apart, it has introduced face masks to our daily lives, and it has caused a mass disruption to the way we work. But now that many lockdown restrictions are easing and we start to return to more “normal” ways of working, what are your rights to continue to work flexibly? If your employer wants you to return to the office, then in most cases you’ll have to go back unless their request is unreasonable or it’s unsafe. Whether it’s safe for you to return will depend on factors such as the nature of your employer’s business and how it’s carried out, whether your employer is...

Flexible working arrangements in COVID
Employment Law
National industrial manslaughter legislation would save lives

Strong national industrial manslaughter legislation is what Australian workers need, but a national law is not supported by the Federal Government. As a Workers’ Compensation lawyer in national law firm, I see the lack of consistency across the states and believe there should be national standards to protect all workers. Workers should feel safe no matter what state they live in. The recent death of a worker in Sydney’s Port Botany who was crushed between two shipping containers, and delays in commitment from the NSW Government to investigate industrial manslaughter laws, highlight the need for national reform. In the meantime, the NSW State Government needs to take fast action on...

Outdoor construction worksafe

We're here to help

Start your online claim check now. Or, if you have a question, get in touch with our team.