FOR many years, the NSW and Queensland coal industries operated under a somewhat different set of rules and regulations to the bulk of Australian business.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
They had their own state-based tribunals setting wages and conditions outside of the mainstream industrial relations system.
The mines themselves operated under the jurisdictions of state and federal governments, with the Joint Coal Board in NSW and a Queensland Coal Board in that state.
Although conditions were undoubtedly dangerous and employment uncertain in the decades when underground mining still dominated, work safety improved more recently, when the big open-cuts began to march their way across the Hunter Valley, and other coal-rich basins.
By the time the Joint Coal Board was replaced in 2002 and its responsibilities handed to a body called Coal Services - owned in equal part by the NSW Minerals Council and the mining division of the CFMMEU - east coast mine workers were earning about double the average weekly wage.
From an employer point of view, something had to give. Rio Tinto tried to break the union, but could not. In recent years, the increasing deregulation of the broader jobs market has worked its way into the coal industry, with the big miners turning to labour hire companies to "outsource" their formerly permanent workforces wherever possible.
The union, in turn, has tried to counter this trend. Its latest effort, announced this week, is a class action in the Federal Court against a labour hire firm, WorkPac, with Mount Thorley Warkworth casual Ben Renyard the lead claimant.
The union and WorkPac have already squared off in a number of court cases, with a recent court win by the union ringing alarm bells for employer groups, who fear it flowing through to other industries.
Whatever happens from here, the use of casuals in coal mining has created a two-tier workforce, with "casuals" earning as little as half as much as their permanent colleagues,for the same work, on the same rosters, in some cases worked out a year in advance.
This is neither fair, nor sustainable.
Nor is it necessarily sensible at a time when the industry is facing an existential threat in the form of growing opposition over climate change, and making substantial profits despite recent drops in prices, on the other.
In this light, the WorkPac class action is but a sub-set of a broader set of questions.
ISSUE: 39,389.
While you're with us, did you know Newcastle Herald offers breaking news alerts, daily email newsletters and more? Keep up to date with all the local news - sign up here.
IN THE NEWS