Web viewYou were formerly an employee of MPR Scaffolding? 6 A. Yes ... what's the word? They're not...

ROYAL COMMISSION INTO TRADE UNION GOVERNANCE AND CORRUPTION

Level 1, 12 Moore Street, Canberra City, ACT

On Thursday, 30 July 2015 at 10.00am (Day 14)

Before the Commissioner: The Hon. John Dyson Heydon AC QC

Counsel Assisting: Ms Jeremy Stoljar SC and Mr Richard Scruby

Instructed by: Minter Ellison, Solicitors

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1474 Transcript produced by DTI

1 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Stoljar? 2 3 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, just before we get underway 4 today, it may be appropriate to indicate very briefly where 5 we're going from here. This is the expected to be the last 6 day of these public hearings. Tomorrow, the Commission 7 intends to sit in private session. 8 9 The intention had been to examine the witnesses from 10 the CFMEU this week. However, we have run out of time for 11 that task, at least for this week. We have heard from more 12 witnesses than we had originally expected. We have heard 13 from over 50 witnesses over the last three weeks and that 14 has absorbed that period of time. 15 16 That being the case, the examination of the CFMEU 17 witnesses will be deferred. At the moment it is intended 18 that that examination will take place in the last week of 19 August or the first week of September and the hearings on 20 the issues that we have been dealing with over the last 21 three weeks will continue at that time. The Commission 22 will be dealing with other issues in the hearings 23 commencing in Sydney next week. 24 25 There are just a few housekeeping matters. The first 26 is that a witness for the CEPU put on two witness 27 statements, Daniel Hanford. They were statements dated 28 respectively 17 July and 20 July 2015. Mr Hanford is not 29 required for examination by anyone and I simply ask that 30 those statements be received into evidence. 31 32 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Hanford's statements are 33 received into evidence. 34 35 STATEMENT OF DANIEL HANFORD DATED 17/07/2015 36 37 STATEMENT OF DANIEL HANFORD DATED 20/07/2015 38 39 MR STOLJAR: There are two more witnesses who had been 40 listed for today that nobody wishes to examine and I simply 41 ask that those statements be received into evidence. The 42 first is Mr Dean Law. 43 44 THE COMMISSIONER: Of 29 July? 45 46 MR STOLJAR: Yes, I think so, I just don't have his 47 statement in front of me. Yes, 29 July. I ask that that


1 statement be received into evidence. 2 3 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Law's statement is received into 4 evidence. 5 6 STATEMENT OF DEAN LAW DATED 29/07/2015 7 8 MR AGIUS: Mr Commissioner, we have not required Mr Law 9 for cross-examination on the basis that we have joined 10 issue in material that has been put on and I also 11 understand he may not be well today. 12 13 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, that position is reasonable. 14 15 MR STOLJAR: Likewise, in respect of the CEPU and 16 Mr Hanford, the position is that the issues are joined and 17 there is no contest about that. 18 19 THE COMMISSIONER: Can I just interrupt you for a moment? 20 21 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 22 23 THE COMMISSIONER: I heard a familiar sound. I think that 24 the interests of the first witness are more important than 25 these housekeeping matters. 26 27 MR STOLJAR: Yes, certainly. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: If it is convenient. Mr McCarthy, you 30 seek leave to appear for Ms Roache? 31 32 MR G McCARTHY: I seek leave to appear whilst she gives 33 her evidence. 34 35 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, that is granted. 36 37 MR McCARTHY: Thank you, Commissioner. 38 39 MR STOLJAR: I call Ms Roache. 40 41 THE COMMISSIONER: Ms Roache, is this the most convenient 42 time for you to give evidence? 43 44 MS ROACHE: Yes. 45 46 47


1 <NATASHA MALIA ROACHE, sworn: [10.03am] 2 3 <EXAMINATION BY MR STOLJAR: 4 5 MR STOLJAR: Q. Could you tell the Commission your full 6 name? 7 A. Natasha Malia Roache. 8 9 Q. You are a resident of the ACT? 10 A. I am. 11 12 Q. You are a bank officer? 13 A. Yes. 14 15 Q. With the Commonwealth Bank? 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. Can you just tell us a bit about your background. 19 What did you do after you finished school? 20 A. I worked a few jobs in retail. I did uni for a year 21 but then went to retail jobs and then across to the bank. 22 23 Q. When did you start at the bank? 24 A. Started 2009. 25 26 Q. Is that the first time you'd been a bank officer? 27 A. That's correct. 28 29 Q. What did they start you off doing in 2009? 30 A. I started off as a teller, sir. 31 32 Q. A teller. How long were you doing that for? 33 A. About a year and a half. 34 35 Q. So through to about the middle of 2010? 36 A. That's correct, yes. 37 38 Q. And then in the middle of 2010, what position did you 39 take up? 40 A. I was promoted to customer service specialist, so 41 doing inquiries and products. 42 43 Q. As at August 2010, you had been a customer service 44 specialist for about - well, just a couple of months? 45 A. That's correct, yes. 46 47 Q. Had you had occasion to witness stat decs or the like

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1477 N M ROACHE (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by DTI

1 when you were a teller? 2 A. No. 3 4 Q. You started doing that when you were a customer 5 service representative? 6 A. Yes, correct. 7 8 Q. So you had only really been engaged in that sort of 9 activity for a couple of months as at August 2010? 10 A. For stat decs, yes. 11 12 Q. Can I show you a document that has been marked RJ-2. 13 It will come up on the screen but I will give you a hard 14 copy. If you just have a look at that document, you can 15 see on the front page it says, "Employer's Declaration in 16 Support of Application for Approval of Enterprise 17 Agreement". And then if you travel through this document 18 to the last page, is that your signature? 19 A. Yes, it is. 20 21 Q. Is it your handwriting where it says "Natasha Roache"? 22 A. Yes, that's correct. 23 24 Q. Is it your handwriting where it says "05/8/10"? 25 A. Yes, it is. 26 27 Q. May we take it that you placed your signature on the 28 document on the same day that you dated it, namely, 29 5 August 2010? 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. And the stamp for the Commonwealth Bank, did you stamp 33 that yourself? 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. Do I take it that that stamp wouldn't, in the ordinary 37 course, leave the premises of the CBA? 38 A. Yes, it wouldn't leave at all. 39 40 Q. You wouldn't take it anywhere? 41 A. No, it's not allowed, no. 42 43 Q. Is it fair to draw from that sequence of questions and 44 answers that you signed this document, you wrote your name 45 and you wrote the date and then stamped it on 5 August 46 2010? 47 A. Yes.


1 2 Q. And you did that in the premises of the Dickson branch 3 of the CBA? 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. You see that there is a signature of a deponent 7 immediately above your name? 8 A. Yes. 9 10 Q. Did you observe the person signing the document on 11 5 August 2010 when you signed it yourself? 12 A. I would have, yes. 13 14 Q. You say you would have; do you have a memory of doing 15 that? 16 A. Not a specific memory, no. 17 18 Q. On what basis do you say you would have? 19 A. Because it's a stat dec, if I was putting my signature 20 to it, I would have wanted the person to sign in front of 21 me, otherwise I wouldn't have signed it. 22 23 Q. I just want to be clear about this. You have no 24 memory of this, but you say you would have on the basis 25 that it is a stat dec? 26 A. Yes. I'm signing to say that that person has signed 27 in front of me, so if they have not signed in front of me 28 then I would not have signed the document. 29 30 Q. Did you ask for his driver's licence or some other ID? 31 A. I would have to identify him, yes. 32 33 Q. You would have? 34 A. Yes. Procedure. 35 36 Q. Where was this procedure? Was it written down? 37 A. It's part of identifying them when they come into the 38 bank. I'm not just going to witness anyone's signature. 39 40 Q. I asked you was the procedure written down? 41 A. No, not for stat decs, no. 42 43 Q. So you didn't have any written manual or guidelines or 44 policies you could turn to as at 5 August 2010? 45 A. For stat decs, no. 46 47 Q. Did you keep a register at the branch of what


1 documents had been witnessed and what hadn't? 2 A. No, we don't. 3 4 Q. Did you speak to your superior about whether or not 5 you should be witnessing this stat dec on 5 August 2010? 6 A. I don't recall. 7 8 Q. Where were you physically? Was there a booth or the 9 like where people queued up? 10 A. I'm not sure specifically where I was. I would have 11 been in the branch. 12 13 Q. Whereabouts in the branch? 14 A. It could have been at the inquiries counter, I'm not 15 sure. 16 17 Q. In the inquiries counter separate from the teller? 18 A. Yes, that's correct. 19 20 Q. In the ordinary course is there a queue of people 21 waiting to ask questions? 22 A. Yes, sometimes there is, yes. 23 24 Q. So you can be quite busy? 25 A. It can be, yes. 26 27 Q. Have a look at the qualifications or, rather, the 28 words in square branches underneath your signature. Do you 29 see it says: 30 31 [Full name, qualification and address of 32 person before whom the declaration is made 33 (in printed letters)]. 34 35 Do you see that? 36 A. Yes, I do. 37 38 Q. Did you read that at the time? 39 A. I can't recall. 40 41 Q. It's not filled it in, is it? 42 A. No, it's not. 43 44 Q. Why haven't you filled it in? 45 A. I can't recall. 46 47 Q. What was your qualification to witness a stat dec as


1 at 5 August 2010? 2 A. A bank employee. 3 4 Q. Well, you know that a bank employee or official can 5 only witness a stat dec if they've got five years 6 continuous service, you know that? 7 A. I thought some of them required two years service as 8 well. 9 10 Q. Well, when did you think that; as at August 2010? 11 A. I'm not sure specifically for August 2010. I've had 12 documents come in where it says "two or five years 13 experience." 14 15 Q. You had neither two nor five years experience as at 16 5 August 2010, did you? 17 A. No. 18 19 Q. So you didn't have the qualifications that were 20 necessary for the purposes of witnessing a stat dec, 21 did you? 22 23 MR McCARTHY: I object. With great respect, 24 Commissioner, I am a little lost as to the relevance of 25 testing the bank officer about the question of her 26 authority to sign the document or witness the document in 27 the context of this inquiry, but it is a matter I leave 28 with you. 29 30 THE COMMISSIONER: Perhaps Mr Stoljar might say what he 31 submits the relevance is. I have my own opinions on that 32 subject. Mr Stoljar? 33 34 MR STOLJAR: I am testing the circumstances in which this 35 document was signed. It is going to be an important 36 factual question for you, Commissioner, to determine the 37 circumstances in which this document was signed and what 38 use it was put to, and part of the questioning process is 39 to elicit why parts of the documents that one might expect 40 to have been filled out, particularly when the express 41 instruction is there in the document, were not filled out. 42 43 THE COMMISSIONER: I know, obviously, Mr McCarthy, you 44 haven't had the almost irresistible pleasure of listening 45 to a great deal of evidence in this hearing. When you say 46 "relevance" you are speaking of the Terms of Reference? 47


1 MR McCARTHY: I am speaking of that. I certainly don't 2 quarrel for a moment with the appropriateness of inquiring 3 about the location at which the document was witnessed, the 4 ability to verify that the person who witnessed it was, if 5 you like, one and the same, and that she did what she did, 6 but those appear to be the questions that are relevant 7 rather than the character of the document, whether it 8 complies or otherwise with a particular piece of 9 legislation and the like. 10 11 It would be my submission that the inquiry, by 12 reference to the Terms of Reference, can and should be 13 properly looking at the facts and circumstances by which 14 her name and the date and the like were attached, but that 15 is all that would need to be relevant for your purposes. 16 17 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Thank you for those submissions. 18 I do think the questioning is relevant. I can give you 19 reasons if you want them. 20 21 MR McCARTHY: That is fine, thank you, Commissioner. 22 23 THE COMMISSIONER: Don't worry about that, Ms Roache. 24 This is a common occurrence in legal proceedings or factual 25 inquiries like this. Barristers and legal representatives 26 argue with each other from time to time about the forms of 27 questioning. It is not a reflection on you. Yes, 28 Mr Stoljar? 29 30 MR STOLJAR: Q. My last question was that you didn't have 31 the qualifications that were necessary for the purpose of 32 witnessing a stat dec as at 5 August 2010, did you? 33 A. It appears, no. 34 35 Q. And did you know that in August 2010 when you 36 witnessed this document? 37 A. No. 38 39 Q. So you weren't really very familiar with what was 40 required and what wasn't for the purposes of witnessing 41 a stat dec; that's fair, isn't it? 42 A. That's correct. 43 44 Q. And you didn't know at that time, did you, that you 45 needed to be witnessing the document in the presence of 46 a deponent; that's right, isn't it? 47 A. Sorry, how do you mean?


1 2 Q. Well, you didn't know that you weren't qualified to be 3 a witness for a stat dec as at 5 August 2010? 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. Had you ever done it before on that day? 7 A. I can't recall. I may have done other stat decs; 8 I can't specifically remember. 9 10 Q. It is something you hadn't done very often, is that 11 fair to say, as at 5 August? 12 A. I think I would have - I was doing a new role, so, 13 yes, I'd recently started, really. 14 15 Q. You had recently started a new role and is this fair 16 to say, you hadn't witnessed a stat dec very often between 17 about, I think you said, mid-2010 and 5 August 2010? 18 A. Okay, yes. 19 20 Q. So you didn't really have any established practice, 21 did you, in respect of witnessing stat decs in those few 22 weeks? 23 A. Yes, I didn't. 24 25 Q. You say you didn't? 26 A. I didn't have much practice, no. 27 28 Q. Had you had any training in the period between 29 mid-2010 and 5 August 2010 in relation to witnessing stat 30 decs that you can recall? 31 A. Not in relation to stat decs, no. 32 33 Q. Was it because of that lack of familiarity with the 34 process that you didn't become aware that you weren't 35 qualified to witness a stat dec because you hadn't had the 36 requisite period of employment as a bank officer? 37 A. Sorry, can you explain? Sorry. 38 39 Q. Do you think now that it was because of the lack of 40 familiarity with the process and the requirements for 41 a stat dec that you weren't aware that you weren't 42 qualified to witness a stat dec? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. Did you notice, by the way, that the box beneath the 46 words in bold: "Please provide your contact details for 47 any future inquiries", were in handwriting? Did you notice


1 that at the time or do you not remember? 2 A. I can't recall at the time, sorry. 3 4 Q. Do you know whether you were asked to sign just one 5 page or were you asked to sign a whole bundle, do you 6 remember? 7 A. I don't remember. 8 9 Q. And is it possible that because of your lack of 10 familiarity with what was required for a stat dec, that you 11 didn't give that question much consideration? 12 A. Which question, sorry? 13 14 Q. The question of whether you should just sign one 15 page of a document or whether you needed to look through 16 the whole document? 17 A. My understanding would be I'd just sign the one page, 18 as long as it matched the person who was presenting it to 19 me. 20 21 Q. So you think you may have only been given one page of 22 a document? 23 A. No, no, not one page, I would have only had to sign 24 one page, but I would have had more than one page. 25 26 Q. Who did you think was signing the document, can you 27 remember? 28 A. I don't remember, no. 29 30 Q. How many people were there, can you remember that? 31 A. No. 32 33 Q. You just don't remember anything about the occasion at 34 all? 35 A. No. I sign a few documents and certify a lot of 36 documents. 37 38 Q. Isn't this the likely position, that you signed this 39 document and when you signed it, I'm sorry, the signature 40 already appeared on the document, that's the position, the 41 signature of the deponent? 42 A. It wouldn't be likely, no. 43 44 Q. What's that? 45 A. It wouldn't be likely, no. 46 47 Q. Well, not likely but it's possible, isn't it?


1 A. No, I would have asked them to sign again in front of 2 me. 3 4 Q. You say that but you weren't familiar with the 5 practices and procedures required as at 5 August 2010, 6 were you? 7 A. Of the stat decs, no, I wasn't. 8 9 Q. And the likelihood is that you've just - I'm just 10 suggesting this to you, that the likely position is that 11 because of that inexperience and perhaps because it was 12 busy that day and you had other things you needed to do, 13 you've just signed as the witness, despite the fact that 14 the deponent didn't put his signature on the document in 15 front of you; that's right, isn't it? 16 A. No, I wouldn't sign it unless they signed in front of 17 me. 18 19 MR STOLJAR: I have nothing further, thank you, 20 Commissioner. 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Agius? 23 24 MR AGIUS: We have no questions. 25 26 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Morison? 27 28 MR MORISON: Thank you, Commissioner. 29 30 <EXAMINATION BY MR MORISON. 31 32 MR MORISON: Q. Madam, is this the first time you have 33 given evidence? 34 A. Yes, it is. 35 36 Q. The first time you have been accused of doing 37 something wrong at work? 38 39 MR AGIUS: I object to that. The witness hasn't been 40 accused of anything, as I understand it. 41 42 THE COMMISSIONER: To witness a signature on a statutory 43 declaration when one isn't qualified to do so, I think, 44 answers the description in Mr Morison's question. 45 46 MR AGIUS: If that's the allegation of accusation then that 47 deals with my objection. Thank you.

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1485 N M ROACHE (Mr Morison) Transcript produced by DTI

1 2 MR STOLJAR: I just want to clarify one point. I don't 3 want it to be put later that I haven't put squarely - 4 I thought I had, but if it is going to be suggested later 5 I haven't put squarely that this document was witnessed in 6 the absence of the deponent signing it then I perhaps will 7 now put that, just to make it very clear. 8 9 THE COMMISSIONER: I think you have put it twice. I am 10 sorry, Mr McCarthy is rising. 11 12 MR McCARTHY: With respect, I support what Mr Stoljar is 13 saying. He put it I think in very clear terms that that 14 proposition had been put and even advanced the possibility, 15 "I'm suggesting to you the likely position is that because 16 of your inexperience, the deponent didn't put his signature 17 on the document in front of you?" Answer: 18 19 No, I wouldn't sign it unless they signed 20 it in front of me. 21 22 In my submission, the evidence is clear. 23 24 THE COMMISSIONER: I think the allegation has been put and 25 rebutted. 26 27 MR McCARTHY: Precisely. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: I don't think it is necessary, 30 Mr Stoljar, to put it again. 31 32 MR STOLJAR: Thank you. 33 34 THE COMMISSIONER: Now, back to Mr Morison; you have a 35 question that you had put. 36 37 MR MORISON: Yes. 38 39 Q. You are pretty nervous sitting there in the witness 40 box, aren't you? 41 A. It's a new experience for me, yes. 42 43 Q. And you've got a legal team that have given you advice 44 about what's happening in the proceedings and about what 45 the allegation is that has been made against you; is that 46 right? 47


1 MR McCARTHY: I object. It is quite inappropriate to be 2 inquiring about advice that has been provided to Ms Roache. 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: I may not have fully picked up the 5 question. I didn't think he was seeking an account of any 6 legal advice given; in other words, I don't think there is 7 any privilege that applies. 8 9 MR McCARTHY: If the Commission please. 10 11 THE COMMISSIONER: You are not seeking the contents -- 12 13 MR MORISON: No. 14 15 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, very well, Mr Morison. Just one 16 thing, Ms Roache, I am sure you are nervous, most people 17 are nervous when they enter the witness box, some of them 18 enter it many times and they are always nervous. Sometimes 19 in life one performs better when one is nervous, but there 20 is no need to be unnecessarily nervous. Mr Morison isn't 21 going to bite your head off. 22 23 MR MORISON: Q. I am going to be very gentle. You have 24 already indicated fairly that you have absolutely no memory 25 whatsoever of the circumstances in which your signature 26 came to be on that document; that's correct, isn't it? 27 A. That's correct, I don't remember the specific event. 28 29 Q. No memory whatsoever, as you sit there today, of 30 signing that document and putting the stamp on it and 31 putting the date on it, no memory at all; is that right? 32 A. That's correct. 33 34 Q. So what you are telling the Commission is what would 35 normally be your practice; correct? 36 A. Correct. 37 38 Q. And I think you gave evidence that - when this 39 happened, when the signature did appear there, how long had 40 you been working? 41 A. With the Commonwealth Bank? 42 43 Q. Yes. 44 A. Just over a year and a half. 45 46 Q. How long have you been working - are you still working 47 at the Commonwealth Bank?


1 A. Yes, I am. 2 3 Q. How long have you been working for the Commonwealth 4 Bank now? 5 A. About six and a half years, I think. 6 7 Q. So as at that date, when you signed the document, had 8 you ever witnessed a statutory declaration before? 9 A. I can't recall. 10 11 Q. So this might have been the first one? 12 A. Possibly. 13 14 Q. And how many have you witnessed since then? 15 A. I can't recall, sorry. 16 17 Q. Are we talking about hundreds or five or how many? 18 A. Could be hundreds. I'm not - yeah. 19 20 Q. It could be hundreds and this could have been the 21 first one; correct? 22 A. It has the potential it could have been; I can't say 23 yes definitively. 24 25 Q. No, I know, you don't remember it, but this could have 26 been the first one; correct? 27 A. Correct. 28 29 Q. And you have indicated that you had no knowledge at 30 the time of the correct procedures; is that right? 31 A. Yes. 32 33 Q. I think it would be fair to say, wouldn't it, that if 34 indeed this was - you are just assuming it was your first 35 one, or just assume that for a moment, since then, you have 36 become well aware of the proper procedures, haven't you? 37 A. Yes. 38 39 Q. So when you give evidence today about what you would 40 have done back then, that evidence is no doubt influenced 41 by the fact that today if you were to witness a statutory 42 declaration, the procedures you would follow are very clear 43 to you as to what you would do; correct? 44 A. Yes. 45 46 Q. And it's very difficult for you now to go back five 47 years and honestly tell us precisely what you would have


1 done on that day; that's fair enough, isn't it? 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. So it is likely, very possible, that when you did the 5 signature in relation to this particular statutory 6 declaration, that there could have been a circumstance like 7 this, that the person was there, a person purporting to be 8 the deponent was present, maybe with some other people; 9 there were a few people that needed things done on the day, 10 a document was put in front of you that had already been 11 signed. 12 13 MR McCARTHY: I object. This is a hypothesis built on 14 a hypothesis and ultimately what Mr Morison is asking 15 Ms Roache to do is really to speculate about possibility 16 and, with respect, those potentials have been already 17 canvassed by Mr Stoljar. 18 19 THE COMMISSIONER: I think, rightly or wrongly, the last 20 aspect of your objection hasn't been a complete bar in the 21 past. I think what Mr Morison is trying to do is simply 22 put a proposition he will eventually submit as a factual 23 finding. It is a matter really of fairness to the witness 24 that he is doing it. 25 26 MR McCARTHY: If the Commission pleases. 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Q. That was a fairly long question of 29 Mr Morison's. Do you remember it or would you like him to 30 put it again to you? 31 A. Put it again, please. 32 33 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Morison, could you repeat the 34 question? 35 36 MR MORISON: Q. So it's likely, it's very possible, that 37 when you did the signature, when you put your signature in 38 relation to this particular statutory declaration, there 39 could have been a circumstance whereby a person purporting 40 to be the deponent is present, with a document in front of 41 you, maybe even giving a flurry to the document as it would 42 appear to be someone signing a document in front of you, 43 then handing it to you, and you then signing and filling it 44 out as you did. Now, that is a very likely situation in 45 light of your experience at the time, isn't it? 46 A. No. 47


1 Q. When you say "No", you can't honestly say that didn't 2 happen, can you? 3 A. I'd say no, knowing how I do my job. 4 5 Q. You can't honestly say that didn't happen, can you? 6 A. Yes, I can say it wouldn't have happened. 7 8 Q. You have no memory of it, have you? 9 A. Not of this specific event, no. 10 11 Q. Yes, that's right, so you can't honestly say that 12 didn't happen, can you? 13 A. Okay. 14 15 Q. Do you agree with me? 16 A. Well, I know it wouldn't have happened. 17 18 Q. No. You can't honestly say it didn't happen, can you? 19 A. Okay, yes. 20 21 Q. And Madam, it's true, isn't it, that you are sitting 22 there terrified of the consequences of suggesting that 23 something other than the proper course took place, 24 aren't you? 25 A. No. 26 27 Q. You wouldn't want to admit openly of doing something 28 that is against the law, would you? 29 A. No. 30 31 Q. And it is against the law to sign a statutory 32 declaration not in the presence of the deponent, isn't it? 33 A. Yes. 34 35 Q. You don't want to come along and admit to a criminal 36 offence, do you? 37 A. No. 38 39 Q. So, no doubt, you want to make it clear that you would 40 never do something like that, under any circumstances, 41 isn't that right? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. Even though it's possible that you did it by being 45 hoodwinked into doing it even though you didn't think you 46 were doing anything wrong. Do you understand what I'm 47 saying? I'll put it another way. The circumstances in


1 which the document is presented to you, you thought you 2 were doing the right thing, is what I am suggesting to you. 3 You thought the deponent was there, someone purporting to 4 be the deponent, but it wasn't the deponent; that's 5 possible, isn't it? 6 A. No, I would have identified and asked for ID. 7 8 Q. You would have? 9 A. It's procedure. Every customer who walks in you've 10 got to identify them. 11 12 Q. But you didn't know about that procedure on that day, 13 did you? 14 A. No, it's a standard bank procedure. 15 16 Q. You didn't know that procedure on the day, did you? 17 Did you? 18 A. For stat decs? 19 20 Q. That's what you were doing. You didn't know that 21 procedure on the day, did you? 22 A. Well, yes, you'd have to identify the person. 23 24 Q. You didn't know the procedure on that day? 25 A. Yes, I did. 26 27 MR McCARTHY: With respect, she has answered three times, 28 Commissioner. She has answered three times that that is 29 the procedure, she knows the procedure. 30 31 MR MORISON: Q. Madam, you don't know that you asked for 32 a particular form of identification, do you? 33 A. I don't know what particular form of identification 34 I asked for, no. 35 36 Q. Right. You don't even know whether the person was 37 male or female? 38 A. I can't recall the specific event. 39 40 Q. You can't tell us whether they were male or female, 41 can you? 42 A. In relation to this, no. 43 44 Q. That is what I'm asking you about, isn't it? 45 A. Yes. 46 47 Q. Right. You don't know whether it was morning or


1 afternoon? 2 A. No. 3 4 Q. You don't know anything about the circumstances, 5 do you? 6 A. I don't recall. 7 8 Q. That's right, you don't recall, and I suggest to you 9 that your barrister is jumping up and down to protect your 10 interests because he knows that any suggestion by you that 11 you in any way admit to signing the statutory declaration 12 in the absence of the deponent signing in front of you, 13 could cause a serious repercussion for you in your job at 14 the Commonwealth Bank, isn't that right? 15 A. I assume so. 16 17 Q. It is a very, very serious situation, isn't it? 18 A. Yes. 19 20 Q. And I suggest to you, Madam, that the deponent was not 21 the person who presented with you at the Commonwealth Bank 22 on that day, on 5 August, it wasn't the deponent that was 23 there; what do you say about that? 24 A. I'd say no because I'd have to identify the person. 25 26 Q. Well, I suggest to you - I suggest to you - you are 27 saying that to protect your own interests. Because you 28 have no memory of it, you are simply saying that because 29 you want this Commission to believe that you would always 30 follow the procedure that you follow today, but not 31 a procedure that you were familiar with at the time; that's 32 correct, isn't it? 33 A. I'd say no. It's - I'd say no. 34 35 Q. That you are concerned about your job at the 36 Commonwealth Bank, that's why you're maintaining a vigilant 37 response to this questioning because you are worried about 38 your future; correct? 39 A. No. I know I would have asked for -- 40 41 Q. You are not worried about your future? You are not 42 worried about your answers in the Commission today? 43 A. Pardon? 44 45 Q. You are not worried about the evidence you are giving 46 today in the Commission? 47 A. How do you mean?


1 2 Q. You are not worried about the consequences of what you 3 say today? 4 A. I'm telling the truth, sir. 5 6 Q. You are not worried about how it comes out? 7 A. How do you mean, sorry? I don't understand you. 8 9 Q. Why do you have a lawyer? 10 A. Because I am representing the bank. I assume they've 11 provided a lawyer for me. 12 13 Q. If you've just come along to tell the truth, why did 14 you need a pack of lawyers here? 15 A. Pardon? 16 17 Q. Why do you need a pack of lawyers here if you're just 18 coming along here to tell the truth? 19 20 MR McCARTHY: I object. Truly. 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: I think the witness is entitled to be 23 represented by more than one lawyer. 24 25 MR MORISON: I will withdraw that. 26 27 Q. Is the first time you have ever had legal 28 representation? 29 A. Yes. 30 31 Q. Is there any record kept of statutory declarations 32 that are signed at the bank? 33 A. No, there isn't. 34 35 Q. I think you established that was before - you had been 36 at the bank a year and a half, so you weren't actually 37 qualified to do it; is that right? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. So why did you do it? 41 A. I wasn't aware of that at the time. 42 43 Q. You weren't aware that you weren't allowed to sign 44 statutory declarations at the time? 45 A. It's - yes. 46 47 Q. No-one had told you that at the bank?


1 A. Usually when -- 2 3 Q. No-one had told you that at the bank; is that right? 4 A. No-one had told me anything regarding the statutory 5 declarations at the bank, that's correct. 6 7 Q. You had been given no instructions, no training, no 8 induction as to how to do statutory declarations at that 9 time, correct? 10 A. That's correct. 11 12 Q. So why were you signing them then? 13 A. I don't know, to be honest. 14 15 Q. You don't know why you were signing them? 16 A. I may have thought it was -- 17 18 Q. No, you don't know why you were signing them; is that 19 right? 20 21 MR AGIUS: I object to that. The witness is entitled to 22 answer the question before the next question is asked, 23 Commissioner, and she was cut off. 24 25 THE COMMISSIONER: What you say is perfectly correct, of 26 course, if it was an answer, but let's go back, Mr Morison, 27 and put the question again. 28 29 MR MORISON: Q. You don't know why you were signing them; 30 correct? 31 A. Correct. 32 33 Q. In terms of the circumstances in which this happens, 34 I think you might have been asked some questions, although 35 I can't recall whether Mr Stoljar did ask you whether there 36 is some form of booth, or something like that, where you 37 sit down with the people and sign; is that the situation? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. There is? 41 A. There is a counter at the front or there's offices. 42 43 Q. Yes, but is there a designated spot where people would 44 go in order to have this procedure carried out? 45 A. Not a designated spot, no. 46 47 Q. So you just go, what, to the teller at the bank?


1 A. No, the inquiry desk at the front. As you enter the 2 branch, it's right at the front doors. 3 4 Q. There is an inquiry desk, right, and that's where 5 sometimes it would happen; is that right? 6 A. That's correct. 7 8 Q. Just at the desk? 9 A. The inquiry desk or the office, yes. 10 11 Q. You would go to the desk, do it with the person behind 12 the desk, or you would go, "Just wait a moment, I'll get 13 someone", and someone else would take you into an office; 14 is that right? 15 A. That's correct. 16 17 Q. Depending on how busy it was on the day? 18 A. That's correct. 19 20 Q. And has the office or the desk or the layout of the 21 bank changed in the last five years? 22 A. No. 23 24 Q. Are you sure about that? 25 A. Yes. 26 27 Q. Nothing has changed? 28 A. Not the layout, no. 29 30 Q. Well, what has changed? 31 A. The staffing has changed but not the layout. 32 33 Q. Different people are working there but everything else 34 is exactly the same, is it? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. Yes? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. And nothing has changed in terms of you would 41 be - were you working on inquiries at that time? 42 A. I can't recall on that specific day if I was in an 43 office or on inquiries. 44 45 Q. What was your role in the bank at the time? 46 A. Customer service specialist. 47


1 Q. Right. Did you have any legal training? 2 A. No. 3 4 Q. Did you understand - had you ever been informed, prior 5 to you undertaking the task off statutory declarations, of 6 anything to do with the legal ramifications or legalities 7 of a statutory declaration? 8 A. No. 9 10 Q. So the truth is you didn't understand the significance 11 of it, did you? 12 A. At that time I'd say yes. I thought I was just 13 witnessing a signature. 14 15 Q. But you didn't understand the significance of that 16 role, did you? 17 A. Yes, that's correct. 18 19 Q. You agree with me? 20 A. Yes. 21 22 Q. So it was no big deal, was it? 23 A. I had to verify the signature. That's what I was -- 24 25 Q. It was no big deal, was it? 26 A. Well, it is, because I have to make sure it's the 27 right person in front of me and I'm verifying their 28 signature. 29 30 Q. You didn't know - you had no concept that you would 31 end up here? 32 A. No, I did not know I would end up here. 33 34 Q. Or how significant it might be; correct? 35 A. How do you mean in terms of significance? 36 37 Q. Well, you had no idea, no legal training, no 38 suggestion to you why the legality of it was important, you 39 agreed with all that, so I can't imagine why you would 40 think it was significant? 41 A. As far as I understood, my duty was to verify the 42 person in front of me was the person that was signing the 43 document and that's what I was signing for, not the 44 contents of the document. 45 46 Q. You know that today, as you have told us? 47 A. I do know that today, yes.


1 2 Q. You didn't know it then, though, did you? 3 A. I can't recall. I would have -- 4 5 Q. You can't recall what you were supposed to be doing 6 back then, can you? 7 A. It was five years ago. I can't remember -- 8 9 Q. That's right. 10 A. -- what I knew and what I did not know five years ago. 11 12 Q. You see, the deponent wasn't there, someone else might 13 have been, or someone else presumably was, purporting to be 14 the deponent, and the signature was already on the 15 document, or someone pretended to sign it in front of you 16 without you noticing, that's possible, isn't it? 17 A. No. 18 19 Q. Come on, be honest - that's possible? 20 A. No, I would not have signed it. It's like stamping 21 a blank deposit slip and they can just fill in any amount; 22 you don't sign it. 23 24 Q. No, no, no, no, no, that's not like that. The 25 signature was there, no, it's not exactly like that at all 26 because the signature was there, and it's not at all the 27 analogy, Madam. It's not analogous to stamping a blank 28 cheque because the signature was on the document. It is 29 just a question of whether the person standing there is the 30 person who actually signed it, that's what we're getting 31 it. The signature is already there. I'm not saying you've 32 signed it without the signature being there. You've done 33 the right thing. You've signed it, "That's the guy that 34 signed it", and stamped and signed it. That is what we are 35 suggesting. We're not suggesting you have done anything 36 wrong, Madam, in the circumstances. We are simply 37 suggesting that you have been hoodwinked into imagining 38 that that is the person that signed it and that you've then 39 gone ahead and done what you thought was the right thing to 40 do at the time. That is entirely what happened and I am 41 suggesting to you that is the likelihood of what happened. 42 Do you agree with me? 43 A. No, I don't, because the person would have had to show 44 me ID and sign in front of me. If it was pre-signed, 45 I would have asked the person to sign again in front of me. 46 47 MR MORISON: I have nothing further.


1 2 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, thank you, Mr Morison. Can I just 3 ask this question. 4 5 Q. In the branch at that time how many people were 6 working there normally? 7 A. Normally? 8 9 Q. Yes. 10 A. About six to eight staff members, including the 11 manager. 12 13 Q. And had you asked for identification, what sort of 14 identification would it have been? 15 A. I usually asked for 100 points or photo ID, so 16 driver's licence, passport, proof of age, those kind of 17 documents, primary ones. 18 19 Q. Do you have the last page of the document which is 20 RJ-2 in front of you? 21 A. Yes, a copy. 22 23 Q. Where it says, "Signature of Deponent", what is the 24 name? Can you read the name? 25 A. I can't read the name of the signature. I can just 26 make out some of the letters. 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr McCarthy? 29 30 MR McCARTHY: One question. 31 32 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. 33 34 <EXAMINATION BY MR McCARTHY: 35 36 MR McCARTHY: Q. Ms Roache, what are the circumstances by 37 which the bank stamps are used and kept at the bank? 38 A. They're all under lock and key and accounted for at 39 the end of the day to make sure they're there. They're 40 locked in a drawer as well until they are required to be 41 used. 42 43 Q. Are they ever taken away from the bank? 44 A. No. No, they're not taken off the premises at all; 45 they're locked in the safe. 46 47 Q. Is there any doubt in your mind that when you signed

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1498 N M ROACHE (Mr McCarthy) Transcript produced by DTI

1 this document by reason of that bank statement being there, 2 that it happened anywhere other than at the Dickson branch? 3 A. No, there's no doubt. 4 5 MR McCARTHY: Thank you, Commissioner. 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, McCarthy. Mr Stoljar? 8 9 MR STOLJAR: I have nothing further, thank you, 10 Commissioner. 11 12 THE COMMISSIONER: I take it that Ms Roache can be excused 13 from further attendance? 14 15 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 16 17 THE COMMISSIONER: Ms Roache, you are excused from further 18 attendance on the summons. Thank you for giving up the 19 time to come, so you can leave the witness box now. 20 21 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW 22 23 THE COMMISSIONER: I interrupted you in the middle of some 24 housekeeping matters? 25 26 MR STOLJAR: Yes. The final item of housekeeping for this 27 morning was that I ask that you receive into evidence 28 a witness statement of Jason Sands of 15 July 2015 who is 29 in the same category as the earlier witness statements. 30 31 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. That statement is received into 32 evidence. 33 34 STATEMENT OF JASON SANDS DATED 15/07/2015 35 36 MR STOLJAR: The next witness is Mr Spatolisano. 37 38 <VINCE SPATOLISANO, sworn: [10.42am] 39 40 <EXAMINATION BY MR STOLJAR: 41 42 MR STOLJAR: Q. Could you tell the Commission your full 43 name? 44 A. Vince Spatolisano. 45 46 Q. You are a resident of the ACT? 47 A. Yes, I am.

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1499 V SPATOLISANO (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by DTI

1 2 Q. And you presently run your own business? 3 A. That's right, yes. 4 5 Q. You were formerly an employee of MPR Scaffolding? 6 A. Yes. 7 8 Q. You have prepared a witness statement in these 9 proceedings dated 28 July 2015? 10 A. Yes, I have. 11 12 Q. Do you have a copy of that with you? 13 A. I do, it's in front of me. 14 15 Q. Is the content of your statement true and correct? 16 A. Absolutely. 17 18 MR STOLJAR: I would ask that Mr Spatolisano's statement 19 be received into evidence, Commissioner. 20 21 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, it is received into evidence. 22 23 STATEMENT OF VINCE SPATOLISANO DATED 28/07/2015 24 25 MR STOLJAR: I don't have anything further to ask 26 Mr Spatolisano. 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Agius. 29 30 MR AGIUS: Thank you. 31 32 <EXAMINATION BY MR AGIUS: 33 34 MR AGIUS: Q. Mr Spatolisano, do you have any recollection 35 as to where you were on 29 July 2010? 36 A. No, I don't. 37 38 Q. Or, indeed, where you were on any particular day that 39 week? 40 A. No, I don't. 41 42 Q. We have some information from Mr Josifoski and I just 43 want to provide you with it, or some of it at least. Might 44 the witness be shown MFI-2, which is a photocopy of pages 45 of Mr Josifoski's diary for the 29th -- 46 A. This is 16 July here. 47

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1500 V SPATOLISANO (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI

1 Q. 29 July will come up. If you just look at the 2 page for 29 July, would you just confirm that your name 3 isn't there anywhere? 4 A. Okay. Let me have a look here. I don't see my name, 5 "Spatolisano", written on that page, no. 6 7 Q. Does that help you at all to recall what you were 8 doing on 29 July 2010? 9 A. No. No, it doesn't. 10 11 Q. Do you see along the time slot 3.30 and below that 12 there are three names. The first - I am not sure how to 13 pronounce this but "Cvet", C-V-E-T, underneath that "Dusko" 14 and underneath that "Matt"? 15 A. Sure, I see that. 16 17 Q. Do you recall that they were people working for the 18 same scaffolding company as you, MPR? 19 A. Oh, look, I know of the first two names; yes, I know 20 of the first two names. 21 22 Q. And what about the third one? 23 A. The third one I don't, no. 24 25 Q. Would you have regarded yourself as a full-time 26 employee on Thursday, 29 July? 27 A. Yes, I would have been, yeah. 28 29 Q. What about Cvet? 30 A. Look, I can't comment for other people. 31 32 Q. Is that the same for Dusko, you couldn't say? 33 A. Look, I couldn't say, no. 34 35 Q. Do you know how it was determined what your rate of 36 pay would be as at 29 July 2010? 37 A. How it was determined? 38 39 Q. Yes. 40 A. My rate of pay? No, I don't know the mechanics behind 41 that, no. 42 43 Q. Do you know whether it was pursuant to an EBA rate or 44 whether it was pursuant to an Award rate or whether it was 45 pursuant to something else? 46 A. Look, I've never heard of the - of this EBA rate, so 47 I have no recollection of that, so I can't tell you.


1 I didn't know how it was determined. 2 3 Q. Did Mr Josifoski ever tell you that he was negotiating 4 with the CFMEU for an enterprise bargain agreement? 5 A. No, he wasn't; no, he didn't, sorry. 6 7 Q. Did he ever tell you that he had in fact signed an 8 enterprise bargain agreement? 9 A. No, not directly. 10 11 Q. Well, when you say "not directly", what do you mean by 12 that? 13 A. No, he never mentioned it to me, so no. 14 15 Q. Did you find out that he had signed an EBA? 16 A. I can't remember that happening, no, I never. 17 18 Q. You never had any information at all from anybody that 19 your employment was covered by an EBA? 20 A. No. 21 22 Q. In 2010? 23 A. No. 24 25 Q. Might we take it from that that you did not know what 26 the EBA said about what your pay rate should be? 27 A. I didn't even know what the EBA was or it existed, so 28 no, I didn't know anything about this. 29 30 Q. And Mr Josifoski or Mrs Josifoski, neither of them 31 ever told you that there was a copy of the EBA which 32 related to your terms and conditions of employment? 33 A. Absolutely not. 34 35 Q. At the office for you to examine? 36 A. Absolutely not, did not say that to me, no. 37 38 Q. Even to this day you do not know whether or not you 39 were being paid your legal entitlements? 40 A. Possibly, but I was - I was happy with what I was 41 receiving, so I didn't have any problems. 42 43 Q. Would you have been happier if you were receiving more 44 for the same work? 45 46 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner -- 47


1 MR MORISON: I object to that. 2 3 MR STOLJAR: We seem to be straying into the terrain of 4 a -- 5 6 THE COMMISSIONER: A Federal Circuit Court case. 7 8 MR STOLJAR: It is something that I have been avoiding 9 because it is a matter that is before the Federal Circuit 10 Court. I can't see any relevance to these questions other 11 than for those proceedings. 12 13 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, just a moment. What is the 14 relevance, Mr Agius? 15 16 MR AGIUS: There was evidence yesterday from Mrs Josifoski 17 about an EBA being available for people to look at in the 18 office. There was evidence from Mr Josifoski that on the 19 29th people from the Union attended the work site and 20 discussed the EBA with the workers that were there and 21 handed out two copies of the EBA. There was a lot of 22 cross-examination yesterday from my learned friend 23 Mr Morison about what various contractors wanted or didn't 24 want in the scaffolding EBA, and whether or not they would 25 have preferred not to have the rates of pay that were being 26 set out in the EBA. This evidence is being led to respond 27 to all of that evidence. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: There are various points you have just 30 made. The evidence was relevant for various reasons. To 31 take the last one, Mr Slevin in particular was analysing 32 what had happened at various meetings of contractors with 33 some officials from the Union and, for example, was trying 34 to establish flexibility and a negotiation stance on the 35 part of the officials. 36 37 I think questions about Mr Spatolisano's particular 38 terms of employment do seem to be outside those points that 39 you have just itemised. They seem to be different from 40 them. 41 42 MR AGIUS: In my respectful submission, they are relevant 43 to the question as to whether or not his employer ever 44 disclosed the existence of the EBA to him and we have a 45 declaration from the employer indicating that that had 46 happened and I am, with respect, entitled to explore 47 whether or not the employer swore a false declaration.


1 This is not related to the civil action. I do not believe 2 this witness is named as a claimant in that civil action or 3 that there is any claim in relation to underpayment. It 4 relates to whether or not the employer on site was 5 complying with his statutory obligation. 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: There is no doubt that the employer 8 signed a statutory declaration which is incorrect in many 9 particulars, there is no doubt about that at all. One 10 question is - and not for the present witness - how that 11 came to be. 12 13 MR AGIUS: I won't press that question. 14 15 THE COMMISSIONER: In any event, I have a feeling it was 16 answered. I just can't remember what the answer was. 17 18 MR AGIUS: No, I don't think it was. He said he was happy 19 with what he was getting. 20 21 THE COMMISSIONER: I remember that. 22 23 MR AGIUS: And then I asked him whether or not he would be 24 happier with more. 25 26 MR MORISON: That is a ridiculous question. 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Just one moment, Mr Morison. 29 30 MR AGIUS: And that is when the objection was taken. 31 I will withdraw that question and move on. 32 33 Q. Mr Spatolisano - excuse me, people have lots of 34 trouble with my name and I don't mean -- 35 A. It's not the first time, so it's okay. 36 37 Q. I don't mean you any disrespect by that. You say in 38 paragraph 15 that around August, Petar Josifoski mentioned 39 that he was being forced to sign an EBA with the CFMEU. So 40 it does appear that at some stage he told you that he was 41 dealing with the CFMEU over an EBA? 42 A. That's - yes. 43 44 Q. Did he ever tell you what the result of that dealing 45 was? Did he ever tell you, for example, that he had signed 46 the EBA? 47 A. No. And I didn't ask.


1 2 Q. And you didn't ask. You say that he then, having told 3 you that he was being forced to sign an EBA, gave you 4 a membership application form and on his advice you signed 5 it? 6 A. That's correct. 7 8 Q. What advice did he give you? 9 A. That I should sign this form. 10 11 Q. Did he tell you why? 12 A. I didn't ask, no. 13 14 Q. I appreciate you didn't ask but did he tell you why 15 you should sign the form? 16 A. No. 17 18 Q. Did he say anything to you about membership fees? 19 A. I understood there was a membership fee, so yes, there 20 was a fee. What it was I couldn't tell you. 21 22 Q. Did he tell you who would be paying it? 23 A. No. No, I don't think he did. 24 25 Q. Would you look at this document? 26 27 MR AGIUS: This was turned up overnight, Mr Commissioner, 28 and I have copies. I don't know if my friend Mr Morison 29 appears for this witness, I am assuming he doesn't, but I 30 have a copy for him as well. 31 32 MR MORISON: I have a copy. 33 34 MR AGIUS: Q. Do you have a copy there? 35 A. Yes, I do. 36 37 Q. That's your application for membership? 38 A. Yes, it is, that's right. 39 40 Q. And you will see it is dated 28/7/2010? 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. That is your signature in the signature box about 44 two-thirds the way down the page? 45 A. Yes, it is. 46 47 Q. That is your handwriting for the date?


1 A. Yes, it is. 2 3 Q. If you go to the second page, is that your handwriting 4 for bank details, so your name, the BSB number and the 5 account number? 6 A. Yes, it is. 7 8 Q. And again, your signature on that page above the date, 9 28/7/2010? 10 A. Yes, it is. 11 12 MR AGIUS: Mr Commissioner, I invite that document to be 13 tendered and I just draw attention to the address and bank 14 details. We would ask that they be, just in the interests 15 of the witness's privacy, suppressed, but otherwise I urge 16 the tender of the document. 17 18 MR STOLJAR: I tender it, but in addition to the points 19 that my friend has identified in relation to 20 confidentiality, the telephone number perhaps of Mr Kivalu 21 at the bottom of the page, in my respectful submission, 22 should also be kept confidential. 23 24 THE COMMISSIONER: That document that Mr Agius has been 25 asking questions about will be Spatolisano MFI-1. I direct 26 that the residential address of Mr Spatolisano, the 27 telephone number of Mr Kivalu and the bank details of 28 Mr Spatolisano not be published. 29 30 SPATOLISANO MFI-1 MR SPATOLISANO'S APPLICATION FOR 31 MEMBERSHIP DATED 28/7/2010 32 33 MR AGIUS: Thank you, that is my cross-examination. 34 35 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Morison. 36 37 <EXAMINATION BY MR MORISON: 38 39 MR MORISON: Q. Sir, it is fair to say that it is 40 difficult to cast your mind back to the precise 41 circumstances of something that happened almost, or just 42 about, or exactly five years ago, is that fair to say? 43 A. Sorry, are you asking me? 44 45 Q. Yes. 46 A. No, look, I can remember. 47

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1506 V SPATOLISANO (Mr Morison) Transcript produced by DTI

1 Q. You can remember? 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. For example, you said that you considered yourself 5 a full-time employee at the time; is that right? 6 A. I was a casual employee. 7 8 Q. Yes, you were a casual employee but you were working 9 sort of full-time hours, if I can put it that way? 10 A. Yes, I was. 11 12 Q. Is that right? 13 A. Yes. 14 15 Q. And is it fair to say at that point in time you didn't 16 even know what an EBA was? 17 A. That's correct, I had no idea what it was. 18 19 Q. When people say "EBA", that's like a Martian talking, 20 you have no idea what it means; is that right? 21 A. Yes, that's right. 22 23 Q. When Mr Petar Josifoski told you he had been forced to 24 sign an EBA with the CFMEU, as you say, you remember him 25 saying that but you didn't really know what that meant; 26 correct? 27 A. That's right. 28 29 Q. And he gave you this membership application form to 30 sign. Just correct me if I'm wrong, but the circumstances 31 were this, you may not remember this, but he told you that 32 he was going to pay for it, so it wasn't going to cost you 33 anything and that's why, at paragraph 16, you have got 34 there, "MPR reimbursed me for the Union membership fees." 35 Do you see that? 36 A. Yes, I do see 16, yes, that's correct. 37 38 Q. That's because Mr Josifoski told you that he was going 39 to pay for it on your behalf and that's what happened, 40 isn't it? 41 A. I can't remember. 42 43 Q. You can't remember? 44 A. No, I can't remember. 45 46 Q. I am suggesting that's what happened, so you've got no 47 way of saying that didn't happen; correct?


1 A. That's right. 2 3 Q. Right. And that's why you got an extra bit of money 4 in your pay to reimburse you for what was being taken out 5 of your bank account; correct? 6 A. I did get reimbursed an amount, yes, down the track. 7 8 Q. Yes, that's what I am saying. You were reimbursed for 9 what was being taken out of your account? 10 A. I'm not sure if it was taken - to take it out of my 11 account. I mean, I did get reimbursed an amount. Did I 12 know, did I notice it? No. 13 14 Q. You see, the point is Mr Agius has just tendered some 15 documents that have got your name and account details on 16 them in relation to the membership with the CFMEU. Do you 17 understand the purpose of the document that Mr Agius 18 tendered? Do you understand what that document is about? 19 A. I understand it's an application form. 20 21 Q. Right. Do you understand that on the second page of 22 that application form there are account details with your 23 signature on them? Do you see that? 24 A. Yes, I do see that, that's right. 25 26 Q. And what that means is that the Union was siphoning 27 off money from your account as a basis for membership fees. 28 Did you know that? 29 A. I know that now you are saying that to me, so yeah. 30 31 Q. And because Mr Josifoski, your boss, knew about that, 32 he was reimbursing you the money that was being swept from 33 view from your account, do you understand that, by the 34 Union? 35 A. I understand that now that you're telling me, yes. 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: Just one moment, Mr Morison. 38 In addition to that earlier direction I gave, I direct that 39 the witness's email address be kept confidential because it 40 appears on Spatolisano MFI-1. 41 42 MR MORISON: Q. The fact of the matter is you had, 43 yourself, no interest in becoming a member of the Union at 44 that time, did you? 45 A. Absolutely not. 46 47 Q. Would it be fair to say you were happy to be a member


1 if it didn't cost you anything and your boss thought it was 2 a good idea? 3 A. I never wanted to be a member. I didn't know what 4 this Union was. 5 6 Q. I am not saying you did want to be a member. I am 7 just saying that membership fees were being paid for you 8 and your boss signed you up for it. You were content to be 9 part of it; is that right? 10 A. That's a hypothetical, isn't it? I mean -- 11 12 Q. Well, I am asking you -- 13 A. The way I look at it, yes, it's a hypothetical, so 14 I can't really answer that, no. 15 16 Q. But you were very content with your employment with 17 Mr Josifoski, weren't you? 18 A. Yes, absolutely, no problems. 19 20 Q. He was a good employer; you were happy with the 21 arrangements you had with him? 22 23 MR AGIUS: I object to that question, or those two 24 questions. That seems to traverse the area that you have 25 already ruled on, Mr Commissioner, in respect of my 26 question about how happy he was to have received more 27 money. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: I think there may be something in that, 30 Mr Morison. 31 32 MR MORISON: Q. Did you know a guy called Taras or Jacko? 33 A. No. 34 35 Q. It doesn't ring a bell? 36 A. No, it doesn't. 37 38 MR MORISON: I have nothing further. 39 40 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Morison. Mr Stoljar? 41 42 MR STOLJAR: I have nothing further, thank you, 43 Mr Commissioner. 44 45 THE COMMISSIONER: No objection to Mr Spatolisano being 46 excused? 47


1 MR STOLJAR: No. 2 3 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you for attending today. You are 4 excused from further attendance on the summons. You may 5 leave the witness box. 6 7 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 8 9 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW 10 11 MR STOLJAR: The next witness is Mr Da Silva. 12 13 MR AGIUS: In due course, Mr Slevin will deal with this 14 witness on our behalf. Can I just, in announcing that, 15 raise one issue. Might our examination follow Mr Morison's 16 because there is material being raised by Mr Morison which 17 we may need to respond to and the best way to do that is if 18 our examination follows his. 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: Was the questioning of Mr Spatolisano 21 by Mr Morison something you would wish to ask further 22 questions about? 23 24 MR AGIUS: No, but I just thought if we could avoid the 25 possibility of it arising. I am trying to deal with it in 26 a vacuum so that it won't be seen as an application which 27 is in any way responsive to particular questions. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: No-one has any objection to that order 30 of questioning, do they? Very well. Thank you, Mr Agius. 31 Yes. 32 33 <BERNARDO ALPHONSO DA SILVA, sworn: [11.05am] 34 35 <EXAMINATION BY MR STOLJAR: 36 37 MR STOLJAR: Q. Could you tell the Commission your full 38 name? 39 A. Bernardo Alphonso Da Silva. 40 41 Q. You are a resident of New South Wales? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. You were previously a director and shareholder of 45 Rovera Scaffolding Pty Ltd? 46 A. Yes. 47

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1510 B A DA SILVA (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by DTI

1 Q. You have prepared two witness statements in these 2 proceedings, one dated 22 July 2015 and one prepared this 3 morning, 30 July 2015? 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. Do you have those with you in the witness box? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. Is the content of each of those statements true and 10 correct? 11 A. Yes. 12 13 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, I would ask that Mr Da Silva's 14 statements of 22 and 30 July 2015 respectively be received 15 into evidence. 16 17 THE COMMISSIONER: Any objection, Mr Slevin? 18 19 MR SLEVIN: Not in relation to the 22 July statement, 20 Commissioner. The 30 July statement -- 21 22 THE COMMISSIONER: I haven't got that one. Do you have a 23 spare copy? Yes, I have it now. 24 25 MR SLEVIN: You will see simply by reference to the 26 headings "IQ Apartments" and "Linq Apartments", on the 27 first two pages, that this material goes to new topics. We 28 received the statement about half an hour ago in the 29 hearing room. We are not in a position to ask the witness 30 any questions in relation to that statement today and will 31 need to get instructions and respond by statement. I just 32 raise that. 33 34 THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. If it turns out that you do 35 get instructions which cause you to think it necessary to 36 question Mr Da Silva further, then arrangements will have 37 to be made for that to take place, but the problem may not 38 arise, of course, or it may be capable of being handled in 39 the fashion that Mr Agius has indicated on a number of 40 previous occasions, namely, as long as witnesses understand 41 where they are in relation to each other, fairness is 42 vindicated, but thank you for drawing that to my attention. 43 You tender those two statements? 44 45 MR STOLJAR: Yes, I do. 46 47 THE COMMISSIONER: Those two statements are received into


1 evidence. 2 3 STATEMENT OF BERNARDO ALPHONSO DA SILVA DATED 22/07/2015 4 5 STATEMENT OF BERNARDO ALPHONSO DA SILVA DATED 30/07/2015 6 7 MR STOLJAR: Q. Can I take you first to your first 8 witness statement of 22 July 2015. 9 10 MR MORISON: I am sorry to interrupt. I have just got it 11 as well, that is, that statement. I am just wondering, at 12 the end of counsel's assisting examination, if we could 13 have maybe an early - just so I can have a chance to read 14 it before I cross-examine. 15 16 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, certainly. 17 18 MR MORISON: Thank you, Commissioner. 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: Don't worry about all these little 21 debates, Mr Da Silva, it is not your problem. 22 23 THE WITNESS: It's all good. 24 25 MR STOLJAR: Q. How long you have been in the 26 construction industry? 27 A. Around 20 years. 28 29 Q. Just tell me a bit about what sort of work you were 30 doing. Was it always in scaffolding, for example? 31 A. I started doing formwork and then 2002, I think, 32 I started scaffolding, worked for an employee that works 33 for Rovera currently and then started a labour hire company 34 to Rovera, then became a partner at Rovera 2010. 35 36 Q. Were you mainly working in the ACT over the last 37 period of time? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. Doing residential or commercial? 41 A. All types. 42 43 Q. You say, in 4, that Rovera was a scaffolding company 44 that provided hire, labour and transport? 45 A. Yes. 46 47 Q. Hire and transport is hire of the gear, you mean?


1 A. Yes, Rovera basically provided everything. 2 3 Q. When it was hiring you would hire out the gear. Would 4 you actually set it up as well and dismantle it and take it 5 away, is that what you mean by "transport"? 6 A. Yes. 7 8 Q. And "labour" is the men to actually do the work? 9 A. Yes, to erect it and dismantle it, yes. 10 11 Q. In 7 you say: 12 13 In or about early 2013, we started having 14 negotiations with the CFMEU for a CFMEU 15 EBA ... 16 17 Who initiated the discussions? 18 A. Actually, we approached the Union first. At the time 19 I spoke to one of my partners, Robert, about doing our own 20 EBA directly with the Union, with our - with us and our 21 employees instead of going into a total group of all 22 scaffold companies. We were trying to do our own 23 independent EBA. 24 25 Q. Had you been in what you call a total group prior to 26 that time? 27 A. Prior to the EBA it's always been a group. 28 29 Q. Always a group? 30 A. Like total - like, all scaffold companies in Canberra, 31 or they try to get. 32 33 Q. So what, in early 2013 you initiated discussions at 34 the CFMEU because you wished to not be in the total group? 35 A. Yes, that was our intention, because we - we wanted to 36 do our own because we run our own company, so we were happy 37 to do our own EBA. 38 39 Q. Is that really what you are getting at in paragraph 7 40 where you say: 41 42 However, after we started discussions, 43 Jason O'Mara and Tony Vitler from the CFMEU 44 indicated to me that they wanted to have a 45 negotiation with all of the scaffolders 46 operating in the ACT. 47


1 A. Yes, like, basically, they weren't happy with that, 2 so -- 3 4 Q. Did they give you any reason? 5 A. They basically - from my understanding, it's just they 6 want everyone in the group, so everyone has to sign it. 7 8 Q. Why do they want everyone in the group? 9 A. To basically have everyone on the same playing field, 10 I guess, and me, personally, I've always thought it was 11 more the control. 12 13 Q. What do you mean by that? 14 A. Oh, Union memberships and all that kind of stuff, just 15 a dictatorship basically. 16 17 Q. I don't really understand that. What do you mean? 18 A. Oh, they put you in a position that you are basically 19 forced - like, in all my years we would have preferred to 20 deal with the MBA with doing our own enterprise agreement 21 direct to our employees to the MBA, but it was unrealistic. 22 Like, if you dealt with an MBA, you would just have endless 23 headaches with them slowing down the jobs, raising 24 anything, like, regardless, safety issues, that would be 25 their main attack on us, I guess. 26 27 Q. Did you experience those sorts of problems when you 28 had an EBA with the Union? 29 A. No, normally we never had a problem. The only times 30 we ever found issues was mainly our workers didn't have, 31 say - what's the word? They're not in - they'd not become 32 a Union member, I guess. That's the only time we used to 33 have issues. 34 35 Q. If some of your people weren't members? 36 A. Yes. 37 38 Q. How many employees did you have at the time? 39 A. On the scaffold side, that's where they're mainly 40 focused was the labour side of it, we had anything between 41 20 to 30. 42 43 Q. And how many of those people were Union members? 44 A. If I was guessing, I reckon I would have had no more 45 than half of them as members. 46 47 Q. Was there any issue about that?


1 A. There was. 2 3 Q. Who raised issues with you about that? 4 A. I would have to send a letter to the Union with the 5 guys, the list of my employees at the time. 6 7 Q. I have been asking you questions about your statement 8 of 22 July 2015, but you touch on this, I think, in your 9 statement of 30 July. 10 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. Perhaps, since you have raised it, I will take you to 13 that now, if you've got it. You say in paragraph 5: 14 15 IQ Apartments started at the beginning of 16 2013. Every three months, I had to provide 17 the list of my employees to the CFMEU. 18 19 Is that an example of what you are talking about -- 20 A. Yes, basically. 21 22 Q. -- when you "send a letter with a list of my 23 employees"? 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. What did you mean, "I had to"? 27 A. They always wanted to check who was working for the 28 companies. 29 30 Q. When you say "they", who is they? 31 A. It could be anyone, whatever Union representative was 32 calling me at the time. 33 34 Q. Was there someone who dealt with scaffolding more 35 than -- 36 A. The main people I used to deal with was most probably 37 Tony Vitler and Jason O'Mara, generally. 38 39 Q. Did one of those gentleman say to you, "You have to 40 provide a list of your employees every three months"? 41 A. Yes. Generally it was more Tony, I assume. 42 43 Q. And you did that, did you? 44 A. I avoided it as best as I could. 45 46 Q. But you did do it? 47 A. Not really. I did it - I got forced once.


1 2 Q. You say that in paragraph 6: 3 4 In around the middle of 2014, I provided 5 a list of my staff members to the union. 6 7 A. Yes, and that's when I got caught out basically. 8 9 Q. You got caught out? 10 A. I basically got caught out having half my crew with 11 not being Union members. 12 13 Q. What was the size of your crew at that time? 14 A. At the time I think we had 32, I think. 15 16 Q. In paragraph 6 you say: 17 18 The Union discovered that three of my staff 19 members ... were not Union members. 20 21 That's not half, is it? You say: 22 23 The Union discovered that three of my ... 24 25 A. No, it was only because that particular site - the 26 reason I said three was that was just one project. Look, 27 if I had the list of the jobs that we were doing at the 28 time, there could have been like 20, 30 jobs at any given 29 time. 30 31 Q. Oh, I see. You had about 30 staff, roughly? 32 A. Yes, all of us, yes, and they're scattered around. 33 34 Q. They're scattered around -- 35 A. The Canberra region, I guess. 36 37 Q. You provided a list of all 30, did you? 38 A. Mmm. 39 40 Q. And Mr Vitler asked you to get that list to him, did 41 he? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. So you gave him that list and then when you say: 45 46 The Union discovered that three of my staff 47 members, Milos, Josip and Stefan ...


1 2 They are their first names, I take it? 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. "... were not union members." What, he got back to 6 you, did he, Mr Vitler? 7 A. Yes, he gave us a phone call basically putting 8 pressure on to make them Union members. 9 10 Q. You have set out what happened in your statement? 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. I won't take you through it word by word, but, in 14 a nutshell, what happened, you say in paragraph 8: 15 16 I asked the three boys to sign up. 17 18 So that is Milos, Josip and Stefan? 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. How many of your staff were working on the 22 IQ Apartments job at that time? 23 A. It varied but they were my main guys on-site 24 regardless if I needed two or three. The max I would have 25 had at the time, at the peak, would have been no more than 26 10, 11 people. 27 28 Q. In 8 you say: 29 30 "Look, I'll sort out the money youse pay 31 for the membership and at the end of the 32 job you can resign" ... 33 34 Do I take it that you paid the membership fees for those 35 three workers? 36 A. Yes, I just made a deal with them. I got them to pay 37 it direct out of their own money and I was flexible and 38 I just gave them extra hours in their pay just to 39 compensate. 40 41 Q. Coming back to your statement of 22 July 2015 -- 42 A. The first statement? 43 44 Q. Yes. You started having these meetings, you say, and 45 they took place at the CFMEU's office in Dickson? 46 A. Yes. 47


1 Q. You have identified the people who were there, in 2 paragraph 9, or some of them? 3 A. Yes. 4 5 Q. Petar Josifoski from MPR was at one of these meetings 6 at least, or some of them? 7 A. He was definitely at one of them. Like, 8 I can't - look, there were around four to five meetings. 9 10 Q. Right. 11 A. Now, which one he was attending I can't remember. 12 I do remember him being there. 13 14 Q. In paragraph 12 you say, in the final sentence: 15 16 I also recall that Peter Josifoski from 17 MPR walked out of one of the meetings 18 because he was unhappy with the proposed 19 EBA. 20 21 A. Yes. 22 23 Q. What did he say? 24 A. He was saying generally what everyone was saying. It 25 was pretty - it was an unrealistic EBA. Like, my view and 26 I assume - like, I'm not a mind reader from Petar, but 27 I assume he was just looking at it maybe the same way as 28 I was looking at it. It wasn't a 5 per cent increase. 29 Like, when you do all the maths and add-ons, it was working 30 out to be 15 to 20 per cent increase. 31 32 Q. When you say the maths and the add-ons you mean 33 because -- 34 A. When you start adding the whole document that the 35 Union provided us as a draft. 36 37 Q. I am going to take you to some provisions of it in 38 a moment. 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. What you had to pay by way of wages -- 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. -- was being increased by 5 per cent, but in addition 45 you were going to have to pay ACIRT -- 46 A. ACIRT, parking, insurances, certain allowances were 47 going up.


1 2 Q. BUILT-PLUS? 3 A. Yes, and it was just - and then you - there were other 4 things - like, I don't think the boys read the document 5 thoroughly, but there were other things in the fine print 6 that was going up. 7 8 Q. You mention that in 13. The total package increased 9 by about 15 to 20 percent -- 10 A. In the first year, yes. 11 12 Q. You say it was not realistic and it was not realistic 13 because you were going to put your prices up to pay for 14 those expenses? 15 A. Yes, and if you did sign - like, if I signed on the 16 dotted line straight away, in the current time it was 17 unrealistic. 18 19 Q. It may have been unrealistic, but was there discussion 20 about what sort of prices you would have to charge your 21 customers to meet the expenses that you were going to have 22 to pay under the EBA? 23 A. Yes. There was - look, when they started going 24 through the EBA, there was back and forward conversation 25 and then later on, and I assume in the Union's eyes to 26 justify the EBA, they were trying to ask the room what 27 prices it should be, so -- 28 29 Q. That you would charge your customers? 30 A. Should charge your customers, but a lot of - because 31 I was - because of my position as I was Rovera as a hire 32 company, the boys weren't very comfortable maybe, 33 especially the subcontractors at the time that were working 34 for us at the time, in the meeting weren't maybe as open to 35 have that kind of conversation in front of me, and that's 36 why I said - when they started talking I really got up to 37 have a cigarette at the time. 38 39 Q. This is in 23. 40 A. Yes. 41 42 Q. You say: 43 44 I went outside ... 45 46 A. Yes. 47


1 Q. Did someone say that, that they were uncomfortable 2 talking about the prices in your presence? 3 A. No, it's just - because I'm - our - look, we were 4 acting as a hire company, Rovera, and the talks there were 5 mainly about the labour companies. So because I was there 6 representing Rovera as the scaffold company, as the labour 7 side, but because they knew I was, like, a scaffolder, they 8 didn't feel comfortable. 9 10 Q. Go back to 12, the final sentence. You say: 11 12 ... Petar Josifoski from MPR walked out 13 from one of the meetings because he was 14 unhappy ... 15 16 He was concerned about price fixing, wasn't he? 17 A. Maybe, but I think it was more the Union maybe - they 18 did give him a hard time on his job. 19 20 Q. He said that, didn't he? He said words to the effect, 21 "This is price fixing"? 22 A. He did. 23 24 Q. He did say that? 25 A. I'm pretty sure. 26 27 Q. And he walked out of the meeting? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. And it was, wasn't it, to your understanding? 31 A. Yes. Oh, look, collusion. 32 33 Q. Well, that's what was going on, wasn't it? Did you 34 feel you were being - well, I withdraw that. So, to your 35 understanding, what was going on were discussions about 36 what would have to be charged as a minimum floor price to 37 meet the expenses under the EBA? 38 A. Basically. 39 40 Q. And the concern about undercutting was that some 41 companies were not paying EBA rates? 42 A. Yeah. 43 44 Q. And in that way they can undercut on jobs, they can 45 tender for less because they can - they're not paying the 46 same wages and entitlements as people who have signed up to 47 the EBA?


1 A. Yes, basically. 2 3 Q. Was there discussion about what would happen with 4 those companies? 5 A. Yeah. Oh, look, there was a couple of meetings. I'm 6 pretty sure Petar wasn't attending that one and the Union 7 made it very clear, people that don't sign will get a hard 8 time. 9 10 Q. What does that mean, "get a hard time"? 11 A. They would just go to their jobs, pick on them, like, 12 address anything to get a reason to go on their job, 13 I guess, safety issues, or -- 14 15 Q. Look for a safety issue? 16 A. Look for a problem. 17 18 Q. Did they say that because people were expressing 19 concerns that there were going to be other scaffolding 20 companies out there who weren't signing up to EBAs and were 21 going to be able to beat them out on price? 22 A. I assume so. Like, for us, as Rovera, we weren't 23 concerned what other people were doing, so -- 24 25 Q. Well, you were slightly different because you were 26 a hire company principally? 27 A. Yes. Well, look, we did our own thing at the time, 28 so -- 29 30 Q. You say this in 14, you touch on this to some extent. 31 You say: 32 33 I asked whether we could continue on the 34 current EBA and revisit ... in 12 months 35 time. 36 37 That's something you said at the meeting, is it? 38 A. Yes, I mentioned this at the very first meeting. 39 I raised my concerns because at the time the work was 40 slowing down and when work slows down, prices go down, and 41 then all around the world at the time people were getting 42 their wages asked to be reduced. We were the only ones 43 getting asked to bring the price up to 15, 20 per cent 44 increase when the market was going down. 45 46 Q. You say this expressly, don't you: 47


1 We were required to drop prices to remain 2 competitive. It therefore did not seem 3 realistic to me for wages to increase at 4 that time. 5 6 A. Yes. 7 8 Q. The two are intimately connected, aren't they? 9 A. Yes, and I suggested at the time and most of the 10 - I presume most of the guys supported it. I just 11 suggested that we just stick to the current EBA, the old 12 EBA rates for 12 months and then assess and revisit the EBA 13 in 12 months time. 14 15 Q. And then either Mr Vitler or Mr O'Mara said words to 16 the effect: 17 18 The new EBA cannot be delayed. 19 20 A. Basically, it's never going to happen. 21 22 Q. Is never going to happen? You mean a delay? 23 A. Yes. 24 25 Q. Just tell me about the arrangement. Are they sitting 26 up the front behind a desk? 27 A. Oh, basically you're sitting in a room like this. 28 They're at the front, like in a classroom basically. 29 30 Q. And you were sitting behind on chairs or behind desks? 31 A. We had desks and chairs. 32 33 Q. Was that the same for each of the meetings? 34 A. Generally, yes, for the ones I remember. 35 36 Q. In 14 where you raised this problem about the - or 37 revisit it in 12 months' time, that was at the very first 38 meeting, as best as you can recall? 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. Did you keep notes of these meetings, by the way? 42 A. No. 43 44 Q. Did anyone that you observed? 45 A. Could, but most of my notes were written on the 46 actual - I did write notes but it was always on the draft. 47


1 Q. The draft EBA? 2 A. On the EBA they provided. 3 4 Q. And what happened to those drafts? Did you keep them 5 or -- 6 A. I'm pretty sure - look, generally one of the 7 secretaries that works at Rovera, I used to get her to look 8 at my notes and just check all the fine print in the stuff 9 that I couldn't understand. 10 11 Q. We might write to you about this after today's 12 hearing, Mr Da Silva, but we'll just write and ask whether 13 you are able to track down any of those agreements now. 14 Rovera went into liquidation, did it? 15 A. Rovera? No. 16 17 Q. I am sorry, you left Rovera? 18 A. Yes. 19 20 Q. You have sold your interest? 21 A. Yes. 22 23 Q. I withdraw that, it didn't go into liquidation, but 24 you left it and sold your interest. As far as you know, 25 the EBA documents, if there are any, would still be at the 26 premises of Rovera? 27 A. Could be. I couldn't say for certain, but I'm pretty 28 sure they would have a signed copy. 29 30 Q. I beg your pardon? You say you're sure they would 31 have a signed copy. I was more concerned about any drafts 32 that you may have written notes on. 33 A. I'm pretty sure they should. Normally we used to keep 34 good records. 35 36 Q. Did anyone at any one of these meetings talk about 37 a kitty that people would put $10,000 or some sum of money 38 into? 39 A. I heard about it but, to be quite honest, I can't 40 remember it. 41 42 Q. Who discussed it, do you remember? 43 A. It was discussed at one of the meetings; which one, 44 I can't tell you. 45 46 Q. What was the basic idea, can you remember? 47 A. Oh, something to do with some fundraising, that you


1 had to put in 10 grand. 2 3 Q. Was that to cover if anyone undercut? 4 A. Yes, they were trying to - it was basically everyone 5 puts 10,000 in a bank account, I guess, and whoever drops 6 below that loses it, basically. 7 8 Q. Drops below what - you mean the price? 9 A. A certain rate that they were trying to negotiate, to 10 have a fixed rate. 11 12 Q. A price that they charged their customer? 13 A. Yes. 14 15 Q. So anyone who dropped below the minimum rate -- 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. -- would lose the money? 19 A. Basically lose the entitlement to be in that pool of 20 money, I guess. 21 22 Q. Who was going to manage the money? 23 A. That's what I found strange. To be quite honest, 24 I didn't really listen to it too much. I did step in and 25 out of those meetings a lot because it did drag on. You 26 weren't there just about the EBA sometimes. 27 28 Q. What is the answer? Do you know who was going to 29 manage the money and in whose name would the account be? 30 A. Look, I don't think it got that far, to be quite 31 honest. 32 33 Q. When you say lose if you didn't charge the correct 34 price, what happens to the money if you lose it? 35 A. I just assumed that you're not entitled to it, but the 36 thing is, like, my argument in a lot of it was, when they 37 raised it I found it funny. I said, "How would you police 38 it? How would you manage it?" Look, it was a pretty 39 stupid idea for me. 40 41 Q. Did you say that at the time? 42 A. Yes. Oh look, that's why I cracked up, that's why 43 I didn't want to get involved. That's why I get back to my 44 first point about the - I wanted to do our own independent 45 EBA with the Union because I've been through three to four 46 EBAs with the unions and they have been a waste of time and 47 I prefer to just - I found it would be more effective if I


1 sat down with our blokes who were working for us at the 2 time. I was happy to have the Union present, so they were 3 happy, but it was never going to happen, like I told you 4 before. 5 6 Q. If it is going to be a waste of time and you weren't 7 happy with it, why did you sign an EBA? 8 A. Look, if we didn't, if we get pushed to a corner, they 9 will make it hard for you on any projects in the future, 10 give you a bad name. "Don't use" - maybe go around the 11 builders saying, recommending to use someone else or 12 finding safety issues for an excuse to get on to sites. 13 14 Q. You have been in construction for 20 years. Is that 15 a position you'd taken on the basis of the experience that 16 you'd had over that 20-year period? 17 A. Yes. Look, we saw it, like - there was another 18 scaffold company, To the Top I think they were called, and 19 we saw it first-hand. Like, they gave them a hard time and 20 as soon as they signed the EBA, they left them alone. 21 22 Q. In what way did they give them a hard time? 23 A. They just keep on going to their sites and just - and 24 every time someone - the Union or - a union would most 25 probably use WorkCover to bring them on site as well and 26 just to delay the project, and when you've got, say, 30, 27 40, 50 guys, having them sitting around for an hour or 28 two hours a day, it is unproductive and costs you money, 29 I guess, so you don't want to go through that headache. 30 Sometimes you just thought, "Sign the document, they'll 31 leave you alone", so -- 32 33 Q. Even though you're not happy with it? 34 A. No-one was happy. I don't think any of us wanted us 35 to sign that EBA, I still didn't, but we were forced, 36 basically. 37 38 Q. You have a copy of your EBA in your statement? 39 A. I don't have a copy of it here. 40 41 Q. I will give you that. I am providing you with 42 a hard copy of "Rovera Scaffolding Pty Ltd/CFMEU 43 Collective Agreement ACT 2013". 44 45 THE COMMISSIONER: Is that in evidence or is another EBA 46 in exactly the same form in evidence? Is it AM-2? Is it 47 the same as AM-2; that is to say, Mr McEvilly's annexure?


1 2 MR STOLJAR: Just excuse me a moment, Commissioner. Yes, 3 I think it is in substantially identical terms as AM-2, but 4 AM-2 is for Higher Up Scaffolding and this one is for 5 Rovera Scaffolding. 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: Something can't be nearly unique, it 8 can't be substantially identical; it either is identical -- 9 10 MR STOLJAR: I think, to be on the safe side, I will 11 tender the Rovera Scaffolding Pty Limited document. 12 13 MR SLEVIN: We don't have a copy of that, Commissioner. 14 15 THE COMMISSIONER: That will be Da Silva MFI-1. 16 17 DA SILVA MFI-1 ROVERA SCAFFOLDING PTY LTD CFMEU 18 COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT ACT 2013 19 20 MR STOLJAR: Just while we are tracking one down, I will 21 move this one over and Mr Slevin and I can look on. 22 23 Q. You now have a copy of the Rovera Scaffolding document 24 in front of you? 25 A. Yes. 26 27 Q. If I take you through to clause 28 on page 22, were 28 you aware that there was a clause in the EBA that required 29 Rovera to use an Approved Training Authority for training? 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. Was there discussion about that at the meeting? 33 A. It was brief, but to my understanding they were - we 34 could use whoever we wanted, to be quite honest. 35 36 Q. Did you know that there is a definition of 37 "Approved Training Authority"? Come to page 6 of the 38 agreement. 39 A. To be quite honest, this type of stuff I never really 40 read it, to be quite honest. This is the type of stuff 41 I got the person in the office to go through the finer 42 details. 43 44 Q. I will take you through to page 6, just to ask you 45 a bit about it. 46 A. Page what? 47


1 Q. Page 6. It is clause 3.1 but it's a little confusing 2 because there are two 3.1s. Come to page 6. 3 A. Which one, the first 3.1 or the second? 4 5 Q. The second, the one in the middle of the page, says: 6 7 "Approved Training Authority" means 8 Construction Employment Training Welfare 9 Trust as Trustee for Creative Safety 10 Initiative (CSI). 11 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. Had you heard of Creative Safety Initiative when you 15 signed the document? 16 A. Yes. We knew they were just a union safety 17 organisation, I guess. 18 19 Q. Did you know who operated CSI? 20 A. Yeah, the Union. 21 22 Q. Did you know whether there was any connection, 23 financial or otherwise, between CSI and the Union? 24 A. We assumed so. 25 26 Q. But you didn't know any detail? 27 A. No, but we just thought it was like the 28 Dickson Tradies. You would think that was part of the 29 Union, the same thing. 30 31 Q. Could I take you through to clause 16. 32 A. Which point? 33 34 Q. In particular, 16.4. 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. Did you know that employees were donating $1 per week 38 from the ACIRT contribution to something called the 39 Construction Charitable Works? 40 A. Yes. We raised - in particular, one employee raised 41 his concern about that. He didn't want that, so - but we 42 had no choice. 43 44 Q. Did you make a complaint about that to -- 45 A. We did. We did. We mentioned it to them in one of 46 the meetings; I did in one of the meetings. 47


1 Q. What did either Jason O'Mara or Mr Vitler say? 2 A. Basically, "It's a bit weak if the boys don't donate 3 at least $1 out of their ACIRT." It was - I assumed it was 4 some fund - the way I understood it, it was some fund for 5 the fallen worker, or something like that. 6 7 Q. Did someone give you that explanation? 8 A. That was the way they explained it to me. It was like 9 for people that get injured in the workplace there's a fund 10 that -- 11 12 Q. Did anyone tell you who operates Construction 13 Charitable Works? 14 A. No-one did but I just assumed it was someone like the 15 Union. 16 17 Q. You didn't really know, that was just an assumption 18 you made? 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. Did you know whether there was any connection, 22 financial or otherwise, between Construction Charitable 23 Works and the CFMEU? 24 A. We knew, but in detail you've got no idea. 25 26 Q. You just thought there might be some connection? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. But you didn't know any more than that? 30 A. It's like ACIRT, I just assumed it was run by the 31 unions. 32 33 Q. What about BUILT-PLUS, you mentioned that before, the 34 income protection? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. I will take you through to clause 37, Income 38 Protection Insurance? 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. Had you heard of BUILT-PLUS when you came to negotiate 42 this agreement? 43 A. Never heard of it. 44 45 Q. Did you know that there was a clause in the EBA which 46 required contributions to BUILT-PLUS? 47 A. I didn't think it was force. I just assumed that it


1 was - the way they explained it to us at that time, they 2 shopped around for prices and that was the cheapest rate 3 they could find at the time. 4 5 Q. Right. 6 A. But in saying that, we did get our own office staff to 7 administer and find out if there was anything cheaper. 8 9 Q. Oh, did you? And what did you find out? 10 A. I couldn't answer; I won't know. 11 12 Q. You didn't participate? 13 A. Because that would have been - like, if you could have 14 saved, that would have been dealt with, the office staff 15 and my senior partner at the time, Robert. 16 17 Q. Were you aware of who operates BUILT-PLUS? 18 A. My - look, the way I saw it, we even joked around it 19 in the meeting room. We just thought it was another Union 20 business, so -- 21 22 Q. When you say you joked around, that was just between 23 yourselves? 24 A. That was just between the guys in the meeting, you 25 know, at the EBA meeting. 26 27 Q. Did the Union give you any disclosure about any 28 connection between the two? 29 A. No. No. 30 31 Q. Were you aware of any connection between BUILT-PLUS 32 and Creative Safety Initiatives? 33 A. No. 34 35 MR STOLJAR: I note the time, Commissioner. 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. The hearing will resume at 5 to 38 12. 39 40 SHORT ADJOURNMENT 41 42 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Stoljar. 43 44 MR STOLJAR: Q. Mr Da Silva, can I take you to 45 paragraph 18 of your statement of 22 July 2015. 46 A. Which statement, sorry? 47


1 Q. Your larger one, your first one, dated 22 July. 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. You are dealing here with this issue about what you 5 call the labour rates and you have explained that term in 6 the paragraph before, paragraph 17. In the last sentence, 7 you say: 8 9 By "labour rates" I mean the rate per 10 square metre a scaffolding subcontractor 11 will charge its labour to 12 a head-contractor. 13 14 So with that definition, in 18, you say: 15 16 I can recall that either Tony Vitler or 17 Jason O'Mara said at the meeting the labour 18 companies should agree a standard labour 19 rate that they did not drop below and that 20 the union would "make it hard" for the 21 non-union contractors. 22 23 Let's take that in steps. The standard labour rate is the 24 rate that a subcontractor will charge its labour to 25 a head-contractor? 26 A. For the labour, the head-contractor would be the 27 labour hire companies. 28 29 Q. You say that the Union would make it hard for 30 non-Union contractors. Did they explain anything about 31 what "make it hard" meant? 32 A. Just put pressure on their jobs, I guess. 33 34 Q. The situation is you are all in this room at the 35 Dickson headquarters and as far as you were concerned you 36 didn't want to sign up to this EBA, is that right, and to 37 your observation the other scaffolding contractors there 38 didn't want to sign up to it either? 39 A. No. 40 41 Q. You are agreeing with me, they didn't want to? 42 A. No, none of them did. 43 44 Q. I'm sorry? 45 A. None of the labour companies or anyone who attended 46 that meeting would want to sign that EBA. 47


1 Q. And you are being told or you are being asked about 2 what you needed to charge, what people needed to charge for 3 the labour? 4 A. Yeah, that was just discussions back and forward, 5 I think. 6 7 Q. And you are being told that anyone - if there were 8 non-Union contractors, the Union would make it hard for 9 them? 10 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. You didn't want to be, is this right - tell me - that 13 no-one there wanted to be in the position that the Union 14 was making it hard for them? 15 A. I believe so. 16 17 Q. That is, so they all had to be Union contractors? 18 A. Basically. 19 20 Q. Did you raise any protest about this? Did you say to 21 them, "Look, it just can't work like this; it just can't go 22 on"? 23 A. I did raise my concerns at the start and sometimes 24 during the meeting and I used to have some quiet talks to 25 either Tony or Jason. To be quite honest, they wouldn't 26 listen, so -- 27 28 Q. They wouldn't listen? 29 A. No. 30 31 Q. You say, in 23, that Rovera is primarily a hire 32 company. Did anyone ever tell you not to supply gear to 33 certain people or certain contractors? 34 A. Not that I recall. 35 36 Q. More specifically, were you ever at a meeting at which 37 some of the Union representatives said, "Look, Rovera 38 shouldn't hire out gear to MPR"? 39 A. No, they never said that to us because they wouldn't 40 come to us with that kind of question because he 41 wasn't - we already had our subcontractors in place. 42 43 Q. In paragraph 23, when you say that you went out of the 44 room, that's what you were talking about earlier, you felt 45 that it wasn't appropriate to be there while they were 46 discussing charges, what they would charge, because you are 47 a hire company.


1 A. Yeah. Like we always - I can only talk on behalf of 2 Rovera at the time, but we always try to the price off the 3 labour companies to make it more competitive for us to get 4 our tender out to, like, certain builders out in Canberra, 5 so having a higher labour rate would have made our job 6 difficult to get or win work. 7 8 MR STOLJAR: I have nothing further, thank you, 9 Commissioner. 10 11 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Morison? 12 13 MR MORISON: Thank you, Commissioner. 14 15 <EXAMINATION BY MR MORISON: 16 17 MR MORISON: Q. So in effect you were making a commercial 18 decision. You were just saying, "Look, you just wanted to 19 get on with your business", in relation to what you were 20 doing and your understanding of the other businesses that 21 attended these meetings, you were making a commercial 22 decision, you wanted to get on with your business, without 23 dramas, and the best way seemed to be to sign up to this 24 Union EBA, that was the best way forward, to avoid the 25 dramas? 26 A. Yes. 27 28 Q. Is that right? And that's why you did it? 29 A. Yes. 30 31 Q. As you have indicated, you would have preferred to 32 have a choice? You would have preferred to perhaps deal 33 with the Master Builders and do sort of an independent EBA, 34 or something of that nature, but you thought, "If I do that 35 my workers are just going to be just as happy. However, 36 I'm going to have the Union on my back, closing down my 37 site, creating safety issues that don't exist, coming down 38 and shutting down business and causing problems"? 39 A. Yes, basically. 40 41 Q. And I think you've mentioned, in your view, it was all 42 about these meetings where they were standing up at the top 43 of the table like a dictator, I think you were saying, that 44 the Union wanted control, they wanted to dictate terms as 45 to how you ran your business; is that right? 46 A. Basically, yes. 47

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1532 B A DA SILVA (Mr Morison) Transcript produced by DTI

1 Q. You were asked a question about Peter Josifoski and 2 what he raised at one of the meetings. I want to suggest 3 to you that what - I know it was a while ago, but it was 4 Tony Vitler or Jason O'Mara, one of them said, 5 "We're trying to get you some more money on the jobs by 6 getting all the companies to agree to a minimum price for 7 jobs", this is at one of the meetings, words to that 8 effect, and that's when Petar stood up and said, "This is 9 price fixing. I can't be listening to this. I could go to 10 jail for just talking about it", and walked out? 11 A. I remember he maybe said something along that lines, 12 but exactly word for word, I couldn't tell you. 13 14 Q. But that is -- 15 A. But generally, yes. 16 17 Q. Is that right? 18 A. Yes. 19 20 Q. At that time one of either Tony Vitler or Jason O'Mara 21 responded, "Well, we have done it in the formwork sector in 22 Canberra and it's working there"; in other words, they were 23 suggesting, "Well, we've done it in another sector"? 24 A. Yes, they mentioned a few, like, it happened in 25 Melbourne and all that kind of stuff. 26 27 Q. And you mentioned a minute ago, or a little while ago, 28 just before the break, that it seemed to be, in your mind, 29 like this price fixing that they were seeking was like 30 a collusion. Can I suggest to you it was like the Union 31 were trying to instigate a criminal cartel? 32 A. My opinion is, look, they were trying to justify the 33 EBA and if they got everyone as members it makes it easier 34 for them; that's how they justified it. 35 36 Q. But that's what they were doing. It's another way of 37 having a criminal cartel, isn't it? 38 A. Well, you say it better than me, so -- 39 40 Q. All right. Now, in relation to this issue about the 41 kitty, what I suggest to you was said in relation to that, 42 Mr O'Mara, from up in his pulpit, suggested that all of the 43 scaffolding companies could put forward money into a kitty, 44 in the vicinity of $10,000, and that if one of the 45 companies was naughty and started trying to be competitive 46 and undercut the other ones, he'd lose the lot, lose the 47 10 grand?


1 A. Basically, yes. 2 3 Q. Get put on detention. You were asked some questions 4 about these entities that were also siphoning off money 5 from these agreements. Did you have any idea that the 6 BUILT-PLUS Income Protection Insurance - were you part of 7 that? Did you have to sign up to that, BUILT-PLUS? 8 A. In what way? 9 10 Q. As part of the EBA? 11 A. Yes. 12 13 Q. When it was -- 14 A. Yes. 15 16 Q. Did you understand about $20 a week per employee was 17 going into that? 18 A. Yes, it was approximately, and at the time we were 19 arguing about should it be - we didn't - at the initial 20 start we didn't want it, but then when we were talking 21 about it, we were trying to say it only applies to 22 full-time staff, not casuals, so - because they wouldn't 23 budge from it. 24 25 Q. Not negotiable? 26 A. No. 27 28 Q. "The EBA has to go ahead. There are to be no delays. 29 EBA must start now"? 30 A. Eventually, yes, after a few back and forward talks. 31 32 Q. And there's CSI, the Creative Safety Initiative, did 33 you know about that? 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. Did you know that CSI receives a promoter's fee of 37 about 13.34 percent, did you know about that, for promoting 38 the BUILT-PLUS income protection insurance? Did you know 39 that? 40 A. No. 41 42 Q. Did the Union disclose that to you? 43 A. No. 44 45 Q. Did you know that in the years 2013-2014 that CSI paid 46 $425,000 to the CFMEU? 47 A. No.


1 2 Q. Did you have to pay money to - when they're saying, 3 "Join the EBA. Join the EBA", when you join you have to 4 pay, you have to cough up some more dough, don't you? 5 You've got to cough up $800 for the privilege, haven't you? 6 A. I'm not 100 per cent sure with the process with 7 funding it because normally I was just there as the 8 representative and I used to pass any documentation back to 9 my other partners and the office staff. They would 10 administer all that kind of - if there were payments 11 required. 12 13 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Morison, do you mind if I just 14 adjourn for a few minutes. There is something urgent 15 I have to attend to, I am sorry. I should be back in 16 five minutes. 17 18 SHORT ADJOURNMENT 19 20 THE COMMISSIONER: I am sorry for that delay. Mr Morison? 21 22 MR MORISON: Thank you, Commissioner. 23 24 Q. I was just asking you about some of the extra payments 25 that you were required to pay under the EBA, like on top of 26 the - the EBA made it clear that there was going to be this 27 increase in wages over some number of years; correct? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. And even that seemed out of control in relation to how 31 the industry was faring at that point; correct? 32 A. Yes. 33 34 Q. And you wanted a 12-month delay to see how the 35 industry goes before we start jacking up the wages too 36 much; correct? 37 A. Yes. 38 39 Q. In addition to that, there were these other payments 40 that we were just talking about. There's the payment, the 41 lodgement fee, that was $800, to just lodge the EBA? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. Then there was the BUILT-PLUS insurance, we talked 45 about that, and then there was the CSI payments; correct? 46 Anyway, I'm just recapping it for you. There was also the 47 Charitable Works, Construction Charitable Works, $1 a week


1 per employee as well? 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. Did you know that the CFMEU received $605,250 in 5 donations in 2013? Did you know that? 6 A. No. 7 8 Q. And there was ACIRT. There was extra ACIRT for this 9 one, wasn't there? 10 A. There was a slight difference with everyone else's EBA 11 and our EBA with ACIRT because with the old EBA at the time 12 we were paying I think it was, like, $10 or $15 more than 13 everyone else, so we had a bit of a leeway. 14 15 Q. That was approximately $90 to $120 per week per 16 employee; that's what the ACIRT contribution was. Did you 17 know that? 18 A. 80 or 90? Yes, I think so. I think we were paying 19 100 at the time. 20 21 Q. I think you said, "When we add all this up, it's like 22 a 15 to 20 per cent increase"? 23 A. Yes, when you add everything, yes. 24 25 Q. There was also the travel, wasn't there, there was 26 another allowance for travel? 27 A. Yes, there was travel allowance. 28 29 Q. Parking? 30 A. Parking. There were some other ones; living away -- 31 32 Q. And the income insurance when you're not working, as 33 well. If they got a holiday, they covered you for that as 34 well? 35 A. Yes, but everything increased as soon as you put that 36 15 to 20 per cent and then you started adding your 37 expenses, like Workers' Compensation. 38 39 Q. Even if you signed up for that, you still got hassled 40 by the Union because if your employees weren't all members, 41 they'd still come and hassle you about that; is that right? 42 A. Basically, yes. 43 44 Q. And you were wondering, one of the things was, 45 you know, how are they going to police who's doing the 46 right thing, who's not going to get a detention for 47 undercutting, or whatever, who's going to have to pay the


1 $10,000; right? 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. You had to give your books to them to audit too, 5 didn't you? You had to hand over your books to the Union 6 for them to audit; is that right? 7 A. I never personally gave them, but I just assumed they 8 would make us check - I assumed they just checked if our 9 ACIRT payments and super and all that kind of stuff was 10 getting paid on time. 11 12 MR MORISON: I have nothing further. 13 14 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Morison. Mr Slevin? 15 16 MR SLEVIN: Thank you. 17 18 <EXAMINATION BY MR SLEVIN: 19 20 MR SLEVIN: Q. Do you still have the agreement there with 21 you, Mr Da Silva? 22 A. The enterprise? 23 24 Q. Yes. 25 A. Yes. 26 27 Q. Can you go to page 26 for me. You mentioned 28 BUILT-PLUS in your evidence. Do you see clause 37 of the 29 agreement? 37.1. Can you read that to yourself for me? 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. So you weren't required to take out a policy with 33 BUILT-PLUS itself, were you? 34 A. On that I'm not 100 per cent sure. That was dealt 35 with the office administrator. 36 37 Q. If we just go down to 37.3, you gave some evidence 38 about requests that would only apply to full-time 39 employees. 37.3 records a concession by the Union that the 40 income protection insurance provision not apply to casual 41 employees who were employed for less than six months, 42 doesn't it? 43 A. Yes. 44 45 Q. And that was the outcome of that part of the 46 discussion about this provision, wasn't it, in those 47 negotiations? Were you aware of that?

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1537 B A DA SILVA (Mr Slevin) Transcript produced by DTI

1 A. Yes, we were, but my argument with that point was as 2 soon as a bloke's more than six months casual, 3 automatically, with the EBA, you have to put him as 4 a full-timer, so it - it didn't really make sense to me. 5 6 Q. It gave you the concession that it was only for 7 full-time employees? 8 A. Yes. 9 10 Q. Effectively? 11 A. That's what I thought. 12 13 Q. And then you were asked some questions about the cost 14 and it being $20 per week. The agreement itself actually 15 caps the payment at $20 per week: "The cost of BUILT-PLUS 16 policy will not exceed $20 per week." It doesn't require 17 that it be $20 per week. It, indeed, caps it at $20 per 18 week, doesn't it? 19 A. Yes, I believe so. 20 21 Q. If you have a look at 37.7, just read that to 22 yourself. It makes provision there for an employer who 23 hasn't taken out an insurance policy, or made an insurance 24 payment, I should say, that the company will have to 25 self-insure and provide the benefits that would otherwise 26 be provided, doesn't it? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. That's the final position on BUILT-PLUS. Could I 30 return to your statement and the negotiations. 31 A. The statement? The first one? 32 33 Q. The 22 July statement. I won't be asking you anything 34 about the 30 July statement, Mr Da Silva, so just the 35 22 July statement. You say that the negotiations were in 36 or about early 2013. I suggest to you that the first of 37 the meetings occurred in late 2012. What do you say about 38 that? 39 A. Oh, could have been, but I doubt it, because I thought 40 at the time I spoke to Tony and we brought him to our 41 office at Rovera and he had a discussion with myself and 42 Robert trying to negotiate to do our own enterprise 43 agreement. 44 45 Q. And you thought that meeting was early 2013. I am 46 suggesting to you that these other meetings with the other 47 scaffolders commenced in late 2012?


1 A. Look, could have, I've got no idea. I believed it was 2 2013. If it was end of the year, that's just me just 3 thinking the wrong date. 4 5 Q. And there were about five to six meetings. You have 6 said in your statement three to four and in your oral 7 evidence you said four to five. I suggest to you there 8 were five or six meetings? 9 A. Could have been. 10 11 Q. It was around that number? 12 A. Look, I'm just guessing. 13 14 Q. Those meetings were about two hours long, one to 15 two hours? 16 A. Approximately. 17 18 Q. And they occurred two weeks apart or thereabouts? 19 A. That I can't say. 20 21 Q. It was the process that at the end of each of the 22 meetings there would be agreement amongst the group as to 23 when the next meeting would occur? 24 A. Yes, they would give you a rough date. 25 26 Q. And that would be one to two weeks after that meeting? 27 A. Most probably. 28 29 Q. And the meetings concluded in around March 2013? 30 A. I believe so. 31 32 Q. You give a list of five scaffolding companies 33 represented at paragraph 9. I suggest to you that there 34 were about eight or nine representatives at the meetings. 35 You don't purport to give a full list. 36 A. No. 37 38 Q. Is it your recollection that there were eight to nine 39 scaffolders represented at those meetings? 40 A. Yes, there were a few of them and, like, with my list, 41 they're the only ones that popped out at the time. 42 I couldn't exactly say every one. 43 44 Q. You described being provided with copies of the old 45 EBA and the proposed EBA at the first meeting? 46 A. Yes. 47


1 Q. Those were the working documents for the meetings, 2 weren't they? 3 A. I believe so. 4 5 Q. So everyone had them and Mr O'Mara, when he addressed 6 the meeting, took you through those drafts and there were 7 discussions of the various provisions. That was part of 8 the process that was followed? 9 A. Yes. 10 11 Q. In your statement at paragraph 10 you commence by 12 saying: 13 14 At the first meeting ... 15 16 And then in the paragraphs that follow you describe the 17 events that occurred in the negotiations. Are you saying 18 that the events that follow all occurred at the first 19 meeting or are they things that may have occurred at 20 various meetings? 21 A. Some of it - some of them started in the first meeting 22 but then the other bits and pieces could have been in the 23 first, could have been in the second, or could have been in 24 all three, because generally the meetings were roughly the 25 same kind of back and forward talk. 26 27 Q. In those meetings you were free to speak. You could 28 raise any issue that you wanted to raise; that's correct, 29 isn't it? 30 A. You could. 31 32 Q. And, indeed, you did. In your statement you give 33 examples of things that you raised? 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. And there were broad-ranging discussions about the 37 various topics, weren't there? 38 A. In what way? 39 40 Q. In that people could discuss whatever they wished 41 about each topic. You give the example of wage rates and 42 various things being discussed about wage rates, 43 for example? 44 A. Yes. 45 46 Q. Amongst those attending for the scaffolders, if they 47 had a point of view, there were no constraints on them


1 expressing that point of view and that's what I mean by 2 a wide-ranging discussion? 3 A. Yes, but you had to be very careful in certain things 4 you said too, in saying that. 5 6 Q. But you weren't stopped from participating in it at 7 all, were you? 8 A. No, but there was - the topic of - the one that a lot 9 of general - my thoughts were everyone expressed their 10 concern trying to sign the EBA on that year to delay it for 11 12 months, everyone was on agreement, but when you had 12 a negotiation they wouldn't even listen to your point of 13 view. What do you gain from it? 14 15 Q. On some topics there was robust discussion? 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. And the Union took a strong position on some topics, 19 didn't it? 20 A. Yes, and I could understand that. 21 22 Q. Just on this question of the timing of things, do you 23 still have the agreement there? Can you go to the front 24 page of the agreement? Do you see that the front page of 25 the document is not actually the agreement itself, but it 26 is a decision of the Fair Work Commission? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. Do you see that the decision of the Fair Work 30 Commission actually approving the agreement is dated 31 20 August 2013? 32 A. Yes. 33 34 Q. You see at the last paragraph of the decision: 35 36 The agreement is approved and, in 37 accordance with s.54 of the Act, will 38 operate from 27 August 2013. 39 40 A. I could say yes, that's what I'm seeing, but I've got 41 no idea with the Acts or anything like that, so -- 42 43 Q. It is the date that I am interested in. On the face 44 of the decision, the agreement didn't come into operation 45 until August 2013. 46 A. No, because we had to start paying our guys with the 47 EBA from 1 January.


1 2 Q. 1 January? 3 A. Of 2013, and if there was any error, we would have to 4 do a backpay. 5 6 Q. But in terms of things like the income protection 7 insurance and the like, do you have any idea when those 8 dates -- 9 A. We started - as soon as - now, the date of this 10 agreement, from the date I signed it or whatever, 11 I remember our office staff had problems finding out how to 12 get the income protection and she was back and forward with 13 the Union trying to sort out that 24-hour top-up. 14 15 Q. Can you go to page 33. You mentioned the date you 16 signed it. 17 18 THE COMMISSIONER: Can I just interrupt, Mr Slevin? 19 I think the witness said he had to start making payments 20 from 1 January. 21 22 Q. Which year, 2013 or 2014? 23 A. 2013. 24 25 Q. So there would be a backpay involved? 26 A. Yes. We started paying, but the only problem was we 27 weren't sure - there were certain allowances. The only 28 thing that I think got delayed was the income protection 29 because we were trying to find out where the - who is the 30 insurance provider. 31 32 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you. 33 34 MR SLEVIN: Q. When you say, "We had to pay it", can you 35 give the Commission any detail as to when you made your 36 first payment in accordance with the terms of this 37 agreement? 38 A. In what way? In the wages for the -- 39 40 Q. You made a back payment to 1 January 2013. When did 41 you make that back payment? 42 A. 2013? Can you repeat the question? 43 44 Q. You've said that you had to start paying the terms of 45 the agreement from 1 January 2013. 46 A. Yes. 47


1 Q. And that that was a back payment? 2 A. No, no, no. I just said we started paying the wages, 3 what we thought, until the agreement was done and whatever 4 the EBA we had signed, we would have to backpay it from I'm 5 presuming it was 1 January. If there were any 6 discrepancies in the wages that we agreed to the enterprise 7 agreement, because the agreement started from - even though 8 it's signed in August, it's dated for that year, 9 January 2013; that's what I'm getting at. 10 11 Q. Where are you pointing to there? 12 A. If you look at the date on page 4, it gives you the 13 tiering of the wages. And the reason I know all about this 14 is it was my negotiations with the Union to minimise and to 15 pay certain of these basic scaffolders and intermediate 16 scaffolders. It was my idea about the unsupervised and 17 supervised kind of rates, and, trying to minimise it, we 18 were trying to tier it every six months for certain trades, 19 except our key staff, like, I'd assume, advanced 20 scaffolders, I guess. 21 22 Q. I understand that. If we go back to page 33 of the 23 agreement. 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. You have signed on 27 July 2013. It is signed for and 27 on behalf of the Union on 8 August 2013. 28 A. I signed on 27 July, yes. 29 30 Q. It is signed by the Union on 8 August 2013. 31 A. Yes. 32 33 Q. It is approved by the Commission on 20 August, we see 34 that on the front page there, 20 August decision? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. To operate from 27 August. You mentioned a back 38 payment exercise. 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. The question I was getting at is do you know when you 42 did that? Was it the case that in August 2013, you paid 43 your employees back payments to cover the 1 January 2013 44 rate? 45 A. I can't answer that. Like, I couldn't tell you what 46 day, but I'm pretty sure it would have been paid way before 47 that because if this is the date you're telling me, this is


1 when we've got the letter from, I assume, from whatever 2 government department it is. We would have been paying it 3 as soon as we agreed with the EBA. 4 5 Q. And so -- 6 A. So it could have been prior. 7 8 Q. Can you assist, though, as to when it was? 9 A. Oh, look, it could have been -- 10 11 Q. If I suggested to you - sorry. 12 A. It would have been from the day - anything between 13 March and June, just say. But the only one who could 14 answer that properly would be the office administrator. 15 16 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Slevin, I have a timing question 17 too. One of your questions, and I think this may have been 18 assented to by the witness, was, in effect, that the 19 negotiations finished in March 2013. On 27 July, 20 Mr Da Silva signs and on 8 August Mr O'Mara signs. What 21 happened between March and July/August? 22 23 MR SLEVIN: I think I will need to get some instructions 24 on that, Commissioner. I was looking at the dates in the 25 documents, in terms of asking the questions to the witness, 26 but we will see if we can assist the Commission with that. 27 28 Q. You are no longer employed by Rovera, that's the case, 29 isn't it? 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. So you are probably not in a position to go and look 33 at the records from Rovera as to when the payment was made? 34 A. No. I could ask, but, look, that would be something 35 I assume youse would have to chase. 36 37 Q. The reason I am asking you these questions is you gave 38 evidence earlier about having raised in the meeting the 39 need for there to be some delay before any wage increases 40 were paid because of the state of the industry. 41 A. Yes. 42 43 Q. It looks like, from the face of the document, that 44 there was some delay before any wage rates had to be paid? 45 A. No, no, there wasn't a delay. That was just when 46 we've got the official signed document back to us, but 47 we've been - like I said to you, we've been paying it from


1 the date of 1 January 2013. 2 3 Q. The negotiations were still in their infancy? 4 A. It doesn't matter. We were - we paid it from 5 1 January. 6 7 Q. So, in the first pay period, following 1 January 2013, 8 you paid the increased rates? 9 A. We would have made an assumption until the EBA was 10 finalised, I assume, but everything would have been back 11 paid, to date from 1 January, from our office. 12 13 Q. You are not giving very precise evidence, Mr Da Silva. 14 A. Because I can't give you an exact date. If I was 15 a betting man, I would have said by 30 June - or between 16 March to 30 June, all the guys' pays would have been sorted 17 out because of the group certificates. So, I can guarantee 18 that everything would have been paid prior to 30 June. 19 20 Q. So you are now saying it was in March. It must have 21 been after March that the -- 22 A. I'm only saying March because of -- 23 24 THE COMMISSIONER: He did say it before. I mean, I agree 25 with you it is not very precise, but that is one thing he 26 said before. 27 28 THE WITNESS: And you just assume it, because negotiations 29 were pretty much at the end of it, and I just assumed that 30 by 30 June - because I know that the group certificates 31 have to be finalised, and their pay would have been up to 32 date. The only thing I can guarantee they wouldn't have 33 been paid is the income protection because I remember 34 clearly - because the office administrator asked me, "Do 35 you know who this BUILT-PLUS is?", and I said, "Just deal 36 with the Union and find out so we know who to pay." 37 38 MR SLEVIN: Q. Go to your statement at paragraph 16. We 39 are in the negotiations now. The discussion is in relation 40 to income protection and BUILT-PLUS. You say words to the 41 effect of: 42 43 "We have shopped around, and this income 44 protection insurance is the cheapest going 45 around." 46 47 A. I don't - well, that's what I just figured from what


1 the Union was telling me. 2 3 Q. So, is that again not a precise recollection of what 4 was said, but it's just you trying to extrapolate back as 5 to what you understood? 6 A. No, no, that's what Tony and Jason, in the meetings, 7 "We've shopped around for you guys and that's the max you 8 would be paying is $20", per bloke. 9 10 Q. Okay. So you are now saying that what was said is, 11 "We've shopped around and the maximum you will have to pay 12 is $20"? 13 A. In those lines. 14 15 Q. Rather than the words in your statement, they 16 mentioned $20 -- 17 A. Yes, they did. 18 19 Q. -- to you in that statement? 20 A. They did mention -- 21 22 Q. I want to suggest to you that Mr O'Mara used these 23 words, he said, "We've shopped around and these rates are 24 the best value for money going around", can you dispute 25 that? 26 A. For me, it sounds the same. 27 28 Q. You gave evidence about the discussion about pricing 29 and labour rates. 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. Again, I am not being critical of you, but you are not 33 precise about what words were said in this evidence. Is 34 that because you can't give a full -- 35 A. I remember the majority of it, but you have to 36 remember it's three years ago. 37 38 Q. What I want to suggest to you is that the context of 39 the discussion was much in the way you have described it, 40 that the scaffolders were complaining about the increase 41 that resulted from the proposed EBA; that was the context 42 of these discussions, wasn't it? 43 A. Can you repeat that? 44 45 Q. What was being said at the time that these comments 46 were being made, or the nature of the discussion at that 47 time, was along the lines of, "Look, this is too much to


1 pay, we can't afford to pay this"? 2 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. So that was the discussion, and what was said at that 5 time were comments being made in general? There weren't 6 detailed discussions as to 15 per cent, or 20 per cent, or 7 5 per cent? There was no-one who actually sat down and 8 costed, item by item, these claims by the Union, it was 9 just a general discussion of, "Look, it's not just 10 5 per cent, it's 15, it could be 20 per cent" -- 11 A. No, no, no, the Union always pushed, "It's only a 12 5 per cent increase." It was me and maybe a handful of 13 people that raised that it was going to be 15 to 20, 14 because if you do the math, add it up -- 15 16 Q. But you hadn't done the math at that stage, you 17 were -- 18 A. I did -- 19 20 Q. -- saying, "Look, if you add this" -- 21 A. I did do the math before I raised at the beginning of 22 the meeting. 23 24 Q. So having done the maths, you said, "Well, this is 25 just going to be too expensive for the industry", is that 26 the effect of what you were saying? 27 A. It was not cost effective as me representing Rovera; 28 for me as a businessman, it was unrealistic. I can't talk 29 on behalf of Petar or anyone else. I was just purely for 30 me there. 31 32 Q. I suggest to you that Mr O'Mara responded to these 33 concerns from the scaffolders with words along these lines: 34 "Well, what price per metre do you need to comply with the 35 EBA?" He said something along those lines, didn't he? 36 A. Could have or - don't know, exactly, but he was trying 37 to throw around the room discussion of what the price 38 should be, basically. 39 40 Q. You are not being precise about the words, but you are 41 agreeing with me that he may well have said those words, is 42 that the case? 43 A. Could have. 44 45 Q. It was at that time that someone from the floor said 46 words to the effect of "$15 or $16"? 47 A. I believe so.


1 2 Q. And that Mr O'Mara responded, "Well, if you're quoting 3 less than that, you're an idiot because you couldn't comply 4 with the current EBA"? 5 A. The new EBA, yes. The one they were trying to 6 propose. 7 8 Q. I want to suggest to you that Mr O'Mara's interest in 9 this discussion was to say to the scaffolders, "Look, there 10 are EBA wages and conditions to pay, and you're just going 11 to have to make sure you can pay them." He was interested 12 in making sure the workers got paid in accordance with the 13 EBA, wasn't he? 14 A. Oh, I believe so. 15 16 Q. He was doing his job? That was his job, to make sure 17 that his members, the workers employed by the scaffolders, 18 were going to be paid the EBA rates? 19 A. Yes, I believe so. 20 21 Q. He was interested, in a practical sense, about the 22 costs of the EBA and ensuring that the workers were able to 23 be paid the rates in the EBA? 24 A. I don't think that's all entirely true. 25 26 Q. He was not interested in setting minimum prices, was 27 he? 28 A. In my opinion, he was trying to justify his EBA and if 29 he could get everyone to sign the dotted line, he - he 30 could get it. 31 32 Q. But he wasn't colluding with anyone to fix prices, was 33 he? 34 A. It's - I don't think - he was part of the discussion. 35 But if you didn't sign - like I said before, the way the 36 Union, in my eyes, were trying to organise things was 37 trying to get everyone in the Canberra region, who does 38 scaffolding, to sign the EBA, then everyone is on basically 39 the same EBA and everyone has to price accordingly. 40 41 Q. He wanted all of the workers to be on the same EBA, 42 didn't he? 43 A. But to get the workers, you need to get the companies. 44 45 Q. Yes. But from Mr O'Mara's point of view, he was doing 46 his job as a Union official and he was saying, "Look, the 47 workers in this industry should be paid the industry rates.


1 They should be paid these EBA rates", that was his 2 interest, wasn't it? 3 A. But he wasn't listening to some of the Union members. 4 Like, I'd - my -- 5 6 Q. I am asking you - I'm asking you -- 7 A. I don't think so. 8 9 Q. -- sitting in that meeting, did you not think that 10 Mr O'Mara was interested in ensuring that workers in the 11 scaffolding industry were paid industry rates of pay? 12 A. I believe so, yes. 13 14 Q. You believe he was interested in that, and that was 15 his main motivation, don't you? 16 A. Maybe. 17 18 Q. Not "maybe", definitely, that's what he was doing? 19 A. Like I was trying to tell you, one of his own members 20 wanted us to have our own enterprise agreement. 21 22 Q. Well, that may be the case, but I am talking about 23 sitting in those meetings with Mr Vitler and Mr O'Mara. In 24 late 2012 and early 2013, Mr Vitler and Mr O'Mara were 25 interested in ensuring that industry rates of pay were paid 26 by the employers in that room, wasn't he? 27 A. I believe so. 28 29 Q. These suggestions of collusion were not part of his 30 motivation, were they? 31 32 MR STOLJAR: I object to that, Commissioner. 33 34 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. I think that is a bit hard to 35 defend, but have a go if you wish to. 36 37 MR SLEVIN: I withdraw that question. 38 39 Q. He said nothing about price fixing? 40 A. Yes, he did. 41 42 Q. He said nothing about price fixing; he spoke about the 43 EBA rates of pay, that's all he spoke about, wasn't it? 44 A. He spoke about what the rates should be and if people 45 don't sign the EBA, he'll make it hard for them so they 46 make sure they sign an EBA, so they go back to a level 47 playing field.


1 2 Q. When you are talking about this question of price 3 fixing, you are talking about the EBA rates as well. Do 4 you see those two things as the same thing? 5 A. They're mainly - look, at the time I was more of a 6 hire labour and transport company, but this question was 7 more related to the labour companies, labour hire 8 companies. 9 10 Q. When you are giving me this answer, is that because 11 you are trying to say to the Commission, "Look, I wasn't 12 paying full attention to this part of the discussion"? 13 A. No, no, because it was more targeted for the other 14 subcontractors. 15 16 Q. And because it was targeted for the other 17 subcontractors, you weren't paying full attention. You 18 tell us in your statement that you thought this wasn't 19 about the meeting and you went outside for a cigarette? 20 A. Yes, I thought it was a waste of time. 21 22 Q. You voiced that opinion -- 23 A. Yes. 24 25 Q. -- and you put that in your statement. 26 A. Yes. 27 28 Q. I want to get to this question about whether Mr O'Mara 29 was involved in price fixing. When you say that, are you 30 making reference, or are the words Mr O'Mara used that made 31 you think that, make you think that in the witness box now, 32 those words I put to you earlier, being, "Well, if you're 33 quoting less than that, you're an idiot because you 34 couldn't comply with the current EBA"? 35 A. That was a snapshot. But, like I said to you, it was 36 back and forward discussion in that whole room, and it was 37 discussed for quite a while. Like - like I said to you, 38 I went outside a couple of the meetings, had a cigarette, 39 came back and he was still on about the same conversation. 40 So, even if you didn't pay attention for a couple 41 of minutes, you would be understanding everything. 42 43 Q. You came back after a cigarette and they were still 44 harping on about, "These rates are going to cost us too 45 much, they're not fair to us", that sort of discussion, was 46 it? 47 A. Yes.


1 2 Q. That discussion was about the amount of money that the 3 scaffolders would have to pay their workers, and they were 4 complaining about that, weren't they? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. It wasn't a discussion about what price they could or 8 couldn't charge to the providers of scaffolding or 9 builders, was it? 10 A. It's got everything to do with it. Because the thing 11 is - that's a purely - pure income is labour and that's the 12 only thing they can charge, so that's why they were 13 strongly voicing their opinions, and I was voicing my 14 opinion about the EBA was too high, and that's why the 15 Union was pushing for a discussion about the prices to 16 justify the square metre rate for the labour hire rate, and 17 that's what I've been saying from day dot, it was just to 18 justify the EBA. 19 20 Q. Arising from those discussions, though, there was no 21 understanding or agreement reached about what price should 22 be charged to the industry, was there? 23 A. I believe not. Because, at the end of the day, like 24 a lot of people were saying, "How do you police it? How do 25 you do this; how do you do that?" 26 27 Q. Indeed, those were the comments that you made, and you 28 have set those out in your statement; do you agree? 29 A. Because I was saying it in a sarcastic way at the 30 time. 31 32 Q. And others said that as well? 33 A. Yes. 34 35 Q. In terms of this question of the kitty, was it you who 36 suggested - and whether you said it sarcastically or not - 37 that one way of doing it is, "Well, why don't all of you 38 guys give $10,000 to the Union"? 39 A. I never said it. 40 41 Q. It was your proposal, wasn't it -- 42 A. No -- 43 44 Q. -- Mr Da Silva? 45 A. -- I don't think so. Like, there was just - people 46 were just throwing about, like, things that were discussed 47 in the past, like, what previous people have proposed.


1 A lot of people have suggested that, put money in a bank 2 account, whoever drops, but it's never happened. 3 4 Q. That has been discussed in the past. Were those 5 comments made in the context of other people had raised 6 that sort of proposal before? 7 A. I can't tell you exactly who started that 8 conversation, but there might be other people that can 9 remember better than me. 10 11 Q. But it may have been you who said it? 12 A. Look, I could have started it too. I've got no idea. 13 14 Q. And it's the case that -- 15 A. Like I said, it was in context, "How the hell do you 16 police it?" 17 18 Q. That's right. You may well have started that and 19 said, "Well, look, what about that 10K kitty idea, we all 20 put 10K in and anyone undercuts, they lose their 10K", was 21 that the sort of thing that -- 22 A. Look, I can't remember if it was said by me, said by 23 the Union, said to another bloke, but I remember the 24 discussion being made. 25 26 Q. Just one last question: Mr Morison suggested to you 27 that there was some criminal cartel being discussed. Have 28 you got any idea what a criminal cartel is? 29 A. You tell me. 30 31 MR SLEVIN: Thank you. Nothing further. 32 33 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Stoljar? 34 35 MR STOLJAR: Nothing further. Thank you, Commissioner. 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Da Silva may be excused? 38 39 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 40 41 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Da Silva, thank you for attending to 42 give your evidence. You are excused from further 43 attendance on the summons, so you can leave the witness 44 box. 45 46 THE WITNESS: No worries. Thank you. 47


1 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW 2 3 MR STOLJAR: The next witness is Mr Thompson. 4 5 THE COMMISSIONER: Shall we start him after lunch? 6 7 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 8 9 THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. The hearing will resume at 10 2pm. 11 12 LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT 13 14 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Stoljar. 15 16 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, the next witness is 17 Mr Thompson. 18 19 <DONALD JAMES THOMPSON, sworn: [2.03pm] 20 21 <EXAMINATION BY MR STOLJAR: 22 23 MR STOLJAR: Q. Your name is Donald James Thompson? 24 A. Correct. Yes. 25 26 Q. You are a resident of New South Wales? 27 A. Yes. 28 29 Q. And you are a director of Trojan Scaffolding Pty Ltd? 30 A. Yes. 31 32 Q. You have prepared a witness statement in these 33 proceedings of 28 July 2015. Do you have a copy of that 34 with you? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. Is the content of your statement true and correct? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 MR STOLJAR: I would ask that Mr Thompson's statement be 41 received into evidence, Commissioner. 42 43 MR AGIUS: There is no objection. 44 45 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. That statement is received into 46 evidence. 47

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1553 D J THOMPSON (Mr Stoljar) Transcript produced by DTI

1 STATEMENT OF DONALD JAMES THOMPSON DATED 28/07/2015 2 3 MR STOLJAR: Q. You have been in the construction 4 industry since about 1984? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. You are a director of Trojan Scaffolding but it is not 8 trading as at early this year; is that right? 9 A. Yes. 10 11 Q. So you are working for a scaffolding company called 12 Summit? 13 A. That's right. 14 15 Q. You attended a number of meetings in 2013, re the EBA? 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. Is it fair to say that you don't have a detailed 19 recollection of those meetings as you sit here today? 20 A. No. 21 22 Q. But as best you can, you have set out what occurred in 23 your statement? 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. At paragraph 13, there is talk in your statement, if 27 you just have a look at that, about putting a sum of money 28 into a kitty. When you say "someone suggested it", do you 29 remember who, or was it just an idea that came up? 30 A. No, not really, no. Don't know. It was just an idea 31 that come up. 32 33 Q. So you don't remember who raised it? 34 A. No. 35 36 Q. Did it get into detail or was it just talked about in 37 general terms? 38 A. Very quickly. 39 40 Q. It was very quick? 41 A. Very quickly, yes. 42 43 Q. Just come to paragraph 18. This is more recently, 44 I think, in the last few years, so after 2013. You say: 45 46 ... I have made a number of complaints to 47 the CFMEU ...


1 2 Did you make the complaints to the persons you have 3 identified in paragraph 19? 4 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. Just verbal complaints, were they? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 Q. The problem was that people were undercutting by 10 quoting low prices? 11 A. Correct. 12 13 Q. How did you find out about that? 14 A. You were just told that, you know, you were out by 15 20 per cent, 20 to 30 per cent, and it's just - yes, you 16 know, you're kind of cutting it fine. When I price a job, 17 you're cutting it fine, so you make a certain percentage 18 and you can't go no lower than that, but you're getting 19 beat by 20 or 30, and you get - we mention the companies 20 which are there, you start getting - thinking something's 21 going on. 22 23 Q. Go back to your statement. In paragraphs 8 and 9, 24 this is back in 2013, there was discussion about what might 25 need to be charged per square metre. Just read through 26 paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 for yourself. Have you had a chance 27 to read through those? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. At paragraph 11 you say: 31 32 ... there was discussion about the 33 scaffolders not charging below a certain 34 price. 35 36 As you understood it, was the gist of the discussion to 37 this effect: that there should be a floor price beneath 38 which you don't go? 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. So everyone is going to charge the same floor price? 42 A. Yeah, not to go below a certain price. 43 44 Q. Sorry? 45 A. Not to go to a price, I think, below - a job below 46 a certain price. 47


1 Q. Below a certain price. The problem that you saw in 2 more recent years that you are dealing with at paragraph 19 3 is that some people must have been going below that floor 4 price? 5 A. Yes. In my opinion, yes. 6 7 Q. Did you know whether those companies had EBAs or not? 8 A. I'm pretty sure they didn't. 9 10 Q. Didn't? 11 A. Yes, didn't. 12 13 Q. To your understanding, either they didn't have an EBA 14 or they weren't paying the EBA rates? 15 A. Exactly. 16 17 Q. Just briefly, do you have attached to your statement 18 a copy of the EBA? 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. If I take you through to clause 28, if there is some 22 numbering on the bottom right-hand corner, it is 23 page number 23. 24 A. Did you say 28? 25 26 Q. Clause 28.2 I was going to draw your attention to. 27 Did you have any discussion, or were you aware of 28 clause 28.2 before you signed the EBA? 29 A. No. 30 31 Q. Did you know who the Approved Training Authority was? 32 A. No. 33 34 Q. If I take you back in the document to page 7. 35 A. Of the EBA? 36 37 Q. Yes. There's two clause 3.1s for some reason, but if 38 you look at the one in the middle of the page -- 39 A. Which clause is that, sorry? 40 41 Q. Clause 3.1, but in the middle of the page. 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. It says: 45 46 "Approved Training Authority" means 47 Construction Employment Training Welfare


1 Ltd as trustee for Creative Safety 2 Initiative ... 3 4 Did you know who Creative Safety Initiative was when you 5 signed the EBA? 6 A. CSI, yeah. I've heard of them, yes. 7 8 Q. You've heard of them? 9 A. Yes. 10 11 Q. Did anyone talk to you about a connection they might 12 have had with the Union before you signed the EBA? 13 A. I knew that they were a training facility for the 14 Union, yes, I did. 15 16 Q. So you knew they were connected? 17 A. Yes. 18 19 Q. Did anyone talk to you about any financial arrangement 20 between CSI and the Union? 21 A. Oh, no. 22 23 Q. What about clause 37 on page 27 of the EBA, 24 37.5 - well, 37 generally but I was going to direct you to 25 37.5. Do you remember any discussion about income 26 protection insurance in the meeting, I think it was? 27 A. Yes. Yes, they did bring that up, yes. 28 29 Q. Did you understand what 37.5 says, that the cost of 30 the BUILT-PLUS policy will not exceed $20 per week, per 31 employee? 32 A. Yes. 33 34 Q. Did anyone from the Union talk to you about any 35 arrangements between BUILT-PLUS and the CFMEU? 36 A. Not sure on that one, not sure. 37 38 Q. You can't remember? Can I take you back to clause 16, 39 so page 14 in the bottom right-hand corner. 40 A. 16.5, is it? 41 42 Q. Yes, 16.4 and 16.5. It is essentially talking about 43 donations of $1 per week to Construction Charitable Works. 44 Did you know anything about that? 45 A. They did bring it up, yes. 46 47 Q. They did bring it up?


1 A. Mmm. 2 3 Q. What did they tell you about it? 4 A. Well, basically - I just remember that $1, that $1 was 5 going towards something, I don't know what it was going 6 towards, but - yes. 7 8 Q. But they didn't talk to you about any arrangements 9 between Construction Charitable Works and the CFMEU? Did 10 anyone discuss that with you? 11 A. No, not to my recollection. 12 13 Q. Your signature is on this EBA at page 34. 14 A. Yes. 15 16 Q. You had some issues or concerns about the EBA, didn't 17 you? 18 A. Yes. 19 20 Q. You say in your statement you made a complaint about 21 the fact the agreement was going to go for four years and 22 had wage increases of 5 per cent each year? 23 A. Yes. 24 25 Q. Did you have concerns about the other entitlements 26 that the workers had, for example, the ACIRT, BUILT-PLUS, 27 and that sort of thing, did you have concerns about that as 28 well? 29 A. Well, they were going up at a really rapid rate. 30 31 Q. And it was going to make it hard to pay for all that? 32 A. Yes. 33 34 Q. Without bumping your prices up? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. The prices for your customers, I mean. 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. You were concerned that other companies could start 41 undercutting you if they weren't paying the same wages and 42 entitlements? 43 A. That's right, yes. 44 45 Q. So why did you sign the EBA? 46 A. Well, it was at - because this went on for maybe 47 three, four months, I don't know, just guessing about how


1 long it went on for. We needed to get this signed and get 2 on - get going. If I didn't sign this, I would have 3 been - our jobs would have been, you know, targeted, I'd 4 say. If I didn't sign it, you know, the Union would 5 have - might have - had a go at my sites. 6 7 Q. Targeted in what way? What would happen if you didn't 8 have an EBA? 9 A. Oh, they'd start most probably - they could start 10 stopping the sites, you know, going in, or saying something 11 is wrong with the scaffold, you know, where there may not 12 be something wrong with the scaffold. There's lots of 13 things they could do. 14 15 Q. Right. 16 A. And the other boys were starting to sign it, so 17 I really had to jump on board. I thought I'd be behind and 18 targeted. 19 20 Q. You thought you would be better off signing the EBA 21 and paying the extra rates than running the risk that the 22 work would be interrupted? 23 A. And just pushing prices up and hoping that we got 24 a few jobs, yes. 25 26 Q. Hoped that you would get a few jobs? 27 A. Mmm. 28 29 MR STOLJAR: Nothing further. Thank you, Commissioner. 30 31 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Mr Morison? 32 33 <EXAMINATION BY MR MORISON: 34 35 MR MORISON: Q. To put it a little bit more 36 colourfully -- 37 A. Sorry? 38 39 Q. Putting it a little bit more colourfully, it would be 40 like having - basically, the unions have a gun to your 41 head. If you didn't sign, you may as well pack your bags 42 and leave Canberra? You weren't going to have a pleasant 43 experience working in the ACT? 44 A. Exactly. Might as well just not sign and be done with 45 it. 46 47 Q. Put a gun to your head, that is what they were doing,

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1559 D J THOMPSON (Mr Morison) Transcript produced by DTI

1 wasn't it? 2 A. I wouldn't say put a gun to my head, but I wouldn't be 3 - might as well just get our EBA through. 4 5 MR MORISON: Nothing further. 6 7 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Agius? 8 9 MR AGIUS: Thank you. 10 11 <EXAMINATION BY MR AGIUS: 12 13 MR AGIUS: Q. The meetings you went to were in early to 14 mid-2013 in relation to that EBA? 15 A. Yes. 16 17 Q. Did you make any notes of anything that was said at 18 the meeting? 19 A. No. No. 20 21 Q. But you had a copy of the old EBA and the draft new 22 EBA? 23 A. I didn't have - actually, I didn't have a copy of the 24 old one when we - I just attended the meeting and just 25 listened. 26 27 Q. But you had the one that the Union was proposing that 28 you sign, you had that EBA; you had a copy of that? 29 A. Well, there was different stages. There were a few 30 meetings. From memory, the first one we were just 31 discussing - maybe the second - I went to two or three, 32 I think. The second or third there would have been, yes, 33 a copy of that to go through. 34 35 Q. When you say "a copy of that", I am sure we can infer, 36 but you are talking about the agreement? 37 A. Yes. 38 39 Q. That you could go through, so people did go through it 40 during the course of these meetings? 41 A. Yes, I think we actually ended up taking it home on 42 the last one, to get a chance to go through it. 43 44 Q. Various contractors who were there raised issues about 45 various aspects of the EBA? 46 A. Yes, mainly - well, for the main part of this, the 47 people that were there would have been - the insurance, you

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1560 D J THOMPSON (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI

1 had a work insurance one, and the 5 per cent, going up 2 5 per cent per year, over four years, didn't know why it 3 had to be for the four years, why we couldn't - because the 4 general discussion in the room was to try to keep it - to 5 try to keep the same rate as it was in 2012 for a year or 6 two until we got through - like, we were going through some 7 difficult times, you know, in the industry at that stage, 8 and that's what we wanted to do. 9 10 Q. That was general discussion between all of the 11 contractors that were there? 12 A. General, yes. 13 14 Q. And also was there discussion about how much these new 15 rates are likely to cost the contractors? Were there 16 contractors there who were talking about what they would 17 have to charge in order to cover the new rates in the EBA? 18 A. Yes, I guess. 19 20 Q. It was in that context that people spoke about having 21 to charge $14 or $15 a square metre, just in order to cover 22 the new rates in the EBA? 23 A. Yes, and go up progressively each year after that. 24 25 Q. The contractors raised that as an issue? 26 A. Yes. 27 28 Q. And discussed that amongst themselves generally? 29 A. Yes, generally, yes, in - well, the Union said as 30 well, basically. 31 32 Q. Yes. And I suggest to you that when that topic came 33 up, Jason O'Mara - you know him, don't you? 34 A. I know Jason, yes. 35 36 Q. He said words to the effect, when somebody mentioned 37 $15 or $16 a square metre, "If you're quoting less than 38 that, you're an idiot because you wouldn't be able to 39 comply with the EBA"? 40 A. Yes. I recall that, yes. 41 42 Q. But at no time did he say anything about, "You must 43 all agree to charge the same price", he never said any 44 words to that effect, did he? 45 A. Didn't say "must", no. 46 47 Q. But he didn't encourage all of you to agree together


1 to charge only one price? 2 A. Not one price, but to have a benchmark not to 3 go - don't go below a price. 4 5 Q. But in the sense that if you went below that price, 6 you wouldn't be able to cover the EBA? 7 A. That's right. 8 9 Q. But not in a sense that it would be part of the EBA 10 that you had to stick to that price? 11 A. No, you wouldn't have to, but, yes. 12 13 Q. I mean, his point was, "Look, I want the workers to be 14 paid these rates and get these conditions. It's going to 15 cost you more money, you will just have to put your prices 16 up if you want to cover it"? 17 A. Yes. 18 19 Q. That was commonsense, wasn't it? 20 A. Well, to cover that EBA, yes. 21 22 Q. Everybody was interested to know how much extra they 23 would have to charge just to cover the EBA? 24 A. Yes. Well, we had a rough idea what we have to get 25 to, that's where the $15 or $16 comes from, I'd say, or $14 26 or $15, whatever it may have been back then. 27 28 Q. In your statement at paragraph 11, you say: 29 30 ... there was discussion about the 31 scaffolders not charging below a certain 32 price. 33 34 That was a discussion in this context, wasn't it, that if 35 you charge below $15 or $16 per square metre, then you 36 won't be covering the new EBA rates? 37 A. That's right, yes. 38 39 Q. But there was no agreement between all of the 40 scaffolders that nobody would charge below a certain price? 41 A. No. 42 43 Q. I mean, you didn't tell anybody there what you were 44 going to charge? 45 A. No. 46 47 Q. And you didn't hear anybody else tell you what they


1 were going to charge? 2 A. No. 3 4 Q. You expected, didn't you, that the Union would audit 5 people's wages' records to make sure that people were 6 paying at least EBA rates? 7 A. Yes, that's what they proposed. 8 9 Q. You knew that would be part of the EBA agreement? 10 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. There was discussion about income protection, as you 13 have indicated in paragraph 15, and you say that Jason or 14 Anthony "responded by saying that that issue was 15 non-negotiable". 16 A. Yes, that's right. 17 18 Q. Can I suggest to you that what actually happened about 19 that was that the Union representatives strongly pressed 20 the income protection provisions in the EBA? 21 A. They said, "That's non-negotiable." That's what 22 they -- 23 24 Q. I suggest to you that they didn't use the words "not 25 negotiable", what they said was words to the effect that 26 they were strongly pressing those provisions and that they 27 either were or would become industry standard? 28 A. No, "not negotiable", they said. 29 30 Q. At paragraphs 18 and 19, you refer to complaints that 31 you made to the CFMEU and things that you said to either 32 Mr O'Mara, Mr Vitler or Zach Smith. You had formed the 33 opinion, hadn't you, that people were not paying EBA rates? 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. And your view was, "They mustn't be paying EBA rates 37 because from what I've heard, these people are 38 underquoting"? 39 A. I was getting beat, like I'd been told. 40 41 Q. You were getting beat? 42 A. Yeah, getting beat by 20 per cent. 43 44 Q. And there is no way they could be beating you by 45 20 per cent, or whatever the margin was that you learnt 46 about, if they were paying EBA rates, that was your view, 47 wasn't it?


1 A. Yes. In my opinion, yes. 2 3 Q. When you spoke to Zach Smith or Jason O'Mara, your 4 point was: well, is the Union, you know, making sure that 5 these people are paying EBA rates -- 6 A. Yes. 7 8 Q. -- because they mustn't be paying EBA rates? 9 A. That's right. 10 11 Q. Isn't that the context of the conversation you had 12 with them? 13 A. Yes. 14 15 Q. When they told you that they were looking into those 16 complaints, I suggest to you that what they said to you 17 was, "Well, look, we're going to audit them to make sure 18 that they are paying EBA rates"? 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. Do you agree with that? 22 A. Yes. 23 24 Q. I mean, you subjected your company to the compliance 25 audit, didn't you? 26 A. Yes. 27 28 Q. That required you not to disclose what you were 29 tendering for, what your charge-out prices were, but that 30 required you to provide evidence of what you were paying 31 people who worked for you? 32 A. Yes. 33 34 MR AGIUS: Thank you, Mr Thompson. 35 36 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Agius. Mr Stoljar? 37 38 MR STOLJAR: Nothing further, thank you, Commissioner. 39 40 THE COMMISSIONER: Very well. Mr Thompson may be excused? 41 42 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 43 44 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Thompson, thank you for attending 45 today in answer to that summons that brought you here. You 46 are excused from any further attendance on the summons. 47


1 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 2 3 THE COMMISSIONER: You can leave the witness box. 4 5 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW 6 7 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, the last witness is Mr Watt and 8 I will invite Mr Scruby to take that witness. 9 10 <HORACE IAN WATT, sworn: [2.25pm] 11 12 <EXAMINATION BY MR SCRUBY: 13 14 MR SCRUBY: Q. Could you state your full name, please? 15 A. Horace Ian Watt. 16 17 Q. And you are known as Ian Watt? 18 A. I'm known as Ian, yes. 19 20 Q. You are a resident of the ACT? 21 A. I am, yes. 22 23 Q. You have prepared a witness statement dated 28 July 24 2015? 25 A. Yes. 26 27 Q. Are the contents of that statement true and correct? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 MR SCRUBY: Commissioner, could that statement be received 31 into evidence? 32 33 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Any objections? 34 35 MR AGIUS: There is no objection. 36 37 THE COMMISSIONER: That statement is received into 38 evidence. 39 40 STATEMENT OF HORACE IAN WATT DATED 28/07/2015 41 42 MR SCRUBY: Q. Do you have a copy of that statement? 43 A. I have, yes. 44 45 Q. In paragraph 6 you refer to the EBA that you signed on 46 behalf of Prestige Scaffolding Services. I just wanted to 47 ask you some questions about that document. Do you have

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1565 H I WATT (Mr Scruby) Transcript produced by DTI

1 that attachment? 2 A. I have that, yes. 3 4 Q. Could you go to clause 28 of the EBA; it is on 5 page 23. 6 A. Yes. 7 8 Q. That is a clause that deals with training, do you see 9 that? 10 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. If you look at clause 28.2 - do you have that? 13 A. Yes. 14 15 Q. It says there: 16 17 It is agreed that a training program will 18 be developed and delivered by the Approved 19 Training Authority. 20 21 Do you remember at the time that you signed the EBA whether 22 you knew who that Approved Training Authority was? 23 A. No. No. 24 25 Q. I might ask that clause 3.1 on page 7 be brought up on 26 the screen. 27 A. At page 7? 28 29 Q. Yes. You see there that it is actually the second 30 clause 3.1. It defines "Approved Training Authority", do 31 you see that, about halfway down the page? 32 A. Yes. Yes. 33 34 Q. It is defined as Construction Employment Training 35 Welfare Limited. Do you see that? 36 A. Yes, I see that, yes. 37 38 Q. Did you know about that trust at the time you signed 39 the EBA? 40 A. No. 41 42 Q. You didn't go to any of the meetings at which -- 43 A. No, I didn't, I didn't attend any. 44 45 Q. I think you sent Mr Williams who was one of your -- 46 A. Yes, that's right, yes. He's our delegate for the 47 men.


1 2 Q. I see, yes. Did you and he have discussions about 3 what transpired at the meetings? 4 A. No. He only spoke to our employees because it was for 5 them and I didn't know anything about it until right at the 6 end when we got a draft of what the new EBA would entail. 7 8 Q. I see. Anyway, you didn't know what the 9 Creative Safety Initiative Trust was at the time you signed 10 it? 11 A. No. 12 13 Q. Could you go forward to clause 37 on page 27. You see 14 that is a clause that deals with Income Protection 15 Insurance? 16 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. There is a reference in clause 37.1 to BUILT-PLUS? 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. At the time you signed the EBA did you give any 22 consideration to what your obligations would be in relation 23 to income protection insurance? 24 A. What we done, we looked around for other income 25 protections and then the Union said, "We've got one that's 26 pretty good", so we went with that. 27 28 Q. When you say the Union said that, is that something 29 that -- 30 A. They didn't demand it. They rang me and said had we 31 looked into it and I said, "I've been ringing around to see 32 what we could come up with." And they said, "We've got one 33 that most of the others are going with." I think it's JLT. 34 35 Q. Yes. 36 A. And so we went with them. 37 38 Q. Who was that who contacted you from the Union? 39 A. I'm not too sure; I can't remember. 40 41 Q. Was anything explained to you about what JLT was? 42 A. No. No. I just thought they were a company that 43 looked after that sort of thing, so that was it, just 44 income protection. 45 46 Q. Did you know of any connection between JLT and the 47 CFMEU?


1 A. No. 2 3 Q. Whether direct or indirect? 4 A. Not at all, no. 5 6 Q. Did Mr Williams mention to you whether or not JLT was 7 discussed at any of these EBA meetings? 8 A. No, he never discussed anything with me, only with the 9 men, only with our workforce. 10 11 Q. Could you go please to clause 16.4 on page 14. You 12 see there clauses 16.4 and 16.5 deal with a weekly donation 13 out of ACIRT contributions to something called 14 Construction Charitable Works? 15 A. I didn't notice that before. 16 17 Q. I see. 18 A. No. 19 20 Q. This is the first time today? 21 A. It's the first time that I've really read this. We 22 just were interested in what we had to pay and how much 23 extra we had to put up our rates to cover that, that's all. 24 25 Q. All right. Thank you. Going back to your statement, 26 you see in paragraph 8 you say that in the past 12 months 27 you have had more direct contact with Mr Zach Smith? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. What's the reason for that? 31 A. We had a meeting at the Union office about the 32 upcoming audit and after the meeting I talked to him. 33 I said, "Look, we've had a few bad debts and we're 34 struggling to keep up with all these payments. We're 35 behind in the income protection." And he said, "Leave it 36 with me." And then he called me and he said would I like 37 to meet for coffee and I met him at Coolemon Court in 38 Weston. We had a coffee and he asked about it and I said, 39 "We're catching up; we're still about a month behind." And 40 he said, "Well, when you're caught up let me know and then 41 we'll do the audit." And that's what it was. And also, at 42 that same meeting, we discussed about a few of our 43 customers that hadn't paid for a long time, like 12 months, 44 and one of our customers went bankrupt and he owed us 45 $54,000 and it cost us $5,000 in court and we didn't get 46 anything and he said to me, "We've got our own solicitors; 47 maybe we can help." So about a week later he came to our


1 office and we gave him two customers' names and he said 2 he'd chase them up to see if he could help, but nothing 3 ever eventuated from it. 4 5 Q. Have you had concerns in recent times about being 6 undercut on tenders by other -- 7 A. No, there's only - well, most of the prices are pretty 8 similar but on a few, some of them have been a lot, big 9 discounts compared to what we can compete with. 10 11 Q. When you say "most of the prices are pretty 12 similar" -- 13 A. Yes, most of the -- 14 15 Q. -- is that something that you find out after a tender 16 has been conducted? 17 A. At some meetings I've been to they've always discussed 18 one company that hadn't been paying the right money and 19 that seemed to be the company that kept on beating us on 20 jobs, so -- 21 22 Q. Is that MPR? 23 A. MPR, yes. I don't know MPR at all, wouldn't know any 24 of them if I fell over them. 25 26 Q. You say at some meetings that you've been to this 27 company has been discussed? 28 A. Yes, it's always brought up by others about them not 29 paying the right rates. 30 31 Q. And is this right, it's brought up in this context, 32 that there have been complaints that MPR is winning jobs at 33 prices that are much -- 34 A. Yes, at meetings I've been to just about everybody at 35 the meetings have been concerned about the rates that 36 they've been able to charge on their labour. 37 38 Q. People have been saying, haven't they, that MPR have 39 been winning jobs -- 40 A. Yes. 41 42 Q. -- by quoting low prices? 43 A. Low price on labour that we couldn't do. 44 45 Q. And they are concerns that have been expressed to the 46 CFMEU? 47 A. It has been right through the industry for a long


1 time. 2 3 Q. I am sorry. The concerns about MPR winning jobs by 4 quoting at lower rates, they're concerns that have been 5 expressed at meetings with the CFMEU? 6 A. Yes. Yes. 7 8 Q. Can you give a concrete example of when that has 9 happened? 10 A. I think it happened at a couple of meetings. One was 11 about a new - the audit and also it was one when 12 we - I went to the Union about the - not income protection, 13 it's security of payments, and that was brought up there by 14 some of the others. 15 16 Q. Who brought it up? 17 A. Oh, just some of the other scaffold companies, some of 18 the other labour companies. 19 20 Q. Can you remember which ones? 21 A. No. Usually it was everybody banded together and one 22 would bring it up and the other would say, "We agree" or 23 whatever. 24 25 Q. What was the job that MPR had won that had led to 26 these complaints? 27 A. There was Mayfair Homes, I'd been doing their work for 28 maybe 10 years, and they mainly were doing two-storey 29 houses and that's what we'd do for them, and we had two up 30 at the time and we priced another two and Jason from - rang 31 me up from Mayfair Homes and he said, "That one is ready to 32 come down." And I asked him, "What about the other two?" 33 And he said, "MPR has got that. Their labour was a lot 34 less than yours." And I said to him, "You want to be 35 careful because the Union has been chasing MPR because they 36 don't think they're paying the right rates." 37 38 Q. And that's something that you heard at one of these 39 meetings? 40 A. Yes, I've heard it. 41 42 Q. Is this right - it was a concern to you to hear that 43 MPR wasn't paying the right rates because you didn't want 44 MPR to be quoting lower prices to builders? 45 A. Well, I figured out that they couldn't have paid that 46 sort of money because they couldn't have been paying all 47 the agreements in the EBA.


1 2 Q. And that was a complaint that you made to the Union? 3 A. I never made a complaint to the Union about it; I just 4 mentioned it. 5 6 Q. Some other scaffolders were complaining about it? 7 A. Just about every other scaffold company. 8 9 Q. Were they asking the Union to do something about it? 10 A. The Union rang me at one stage and asked me 11 did - a couple of the fellows that worked for me now worked 12 for them and they said that they had their old pay slips 13 and they were chasing MPR to get those - the back money 14 that they thought they were entitled to. 15 16 Q. But what the other scaffolders wanted the Union to do 17 was to ensure that MPR stopped quoting lower prices to 18 builders? 19 20 MR AGIUS: I object to that question. 21 22 THE WITNESS: No, I don't know. I think they wanted to 23 make sure that they paid the agreement. 24 25 MR AGIUS: I withdraw the objection. 26 27 THE COMMISSIONER: Very flexible, Mr Agius. Where is the 28 purity of principle? Yes, Mr Scruby? 29 30 MR SCRUBY: Q. They wanted to make sure that they paid 31 the agreement -- 32 A. Yes. 33 34 Q. -- to stop them quoting lower prices to do it? 35 A. Yes. Yes. 36 37 Q. You have referred a couple of times I think to 38 a meeting with Mr Zach Smith and other scaffolders this 39 year. Do you recall Mr Vitler saying anything at this 40 meeting about steel fixing companies bringing their prices 41 up? 42 A. No. 43 44 Q. You don't recall it? 45 A. I can't remember any of that at all. All the meetings 46 I went to, there wasn't many, it was all about scaffold 47 things. It wasn't nothing about any other trades, except


1 for the Security of Payment Act. 2 3 Q. I see. 4 A. And then there was multi trades there for that one. 5 6 Q. Do you recall any complaints from scaffolding 7 companies that the 2013 EBA didn't suit them, the market? 8 A. No, not really. I don't have much to do with any of 9 the others, we just stick to ourselves. 10 11 MR SCRUBY: Thank you, Commissioner. 12 13 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Morison. 14 15 MR MORISON: Thank you, Commissioner. 16 17 <EXAMINATION BY MR MORISON: 18 19 MR MORISON: Q. Mr Watt, good afternoon. 20 A. Good afternoon. 21 22 Q. How are you? 23 A. Good. 24 25 Q. You don't like going to these meetings, do you? 26 A. No, I don't. 27 28 Q. In fact, what you did was sent someone along to go for 29 you? 30 A. Well, it's a part of the agreement with the Union is 31 we have a delegate from our men and he attends all the 32 meetings. A lot of the meetings don't include people like 33 me who are owners, business owners. It's for - they 34 represent the men, not me. 35 36 Q. Right. The bottom line is you couldn't stand going to 37 the meetings anyway? 38 A. Not particularly. 39 40 Q. These concerns, I mean, you say you were working 41 with - you had this ongoing agreement with Mayfair Homes? 42 A. Yes, I did, yes. 43 44 Q. And you were getting all their work? 45 A. Not all of it, no, but most of it. 46 47 Q. No, but you got a lot of it and it had been going on

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1572 H I WATT (Mr Morison) Transcript produced by DTI

1 for a decade? 2 A. A lot of it, yes. 3 4 Q. And MPR got a job and you weren't happy about that 5 were you? 6 A. I wasn't - I wasn't happy but it didn't worry me 7 because you win a few, you lose a few. 8 9 Q. But you rang up the Union? 10 A. No, I didn't ring the Union. 11 12 Q. Well, you spoke to the Union? 13 A. When I met Zach at the coffee shop I mentioned it then 14 but I didn't ring the Union at all. 15 16 Q. Right. 17 A. That's after he said to me to tell the fellows that 18 worked for MPR before that he was hoping to get their money 19 that was owing. 20 21 Q. So you spoke to the Union about the fact that they 22 were getting - MPR were undercutting your prices; is that 23 right? 24 A. They were just putting in the rate they could do and 25 we couldn't do that rate. 26 27 Q. But did you know - I mean, you have said you don't 28 have anything to do with these other scaffolding 29 businesses, do you? 30 A. No, I don't, I don't. 31 32 Q. You had no idea, did you, that this new EBA that had 33 been discussed, that MPR wasn't even -- 34 A. I didn't even know. I always thought that everybody 35 has signed the agreement and that was - when I signed the 36 agreement I said, "I'll sign the agreement if everybody 37 else does." 38 39 Q. So the Union told you that everyone had signed, 40 did they? 41 A. That's what - they probably didn't but I thought 42 that's what would happen. 43 44 Q. So you don't know -- 45 A. I don't know. I don't know, no. 46 47 Q. But you don't even know today that MPR refused to sign


1 it? 2 A. No, I don't. 3 4 Q. You were concerned and I think what you said was, the 5 way you worked it out, if you're paying all these other 6 entitlements on top of the wage increases and put it all 7 together, it would be very difficult for a company to be 8 charging rates less and making a profit? 9 A. That's right, yes. 10 11 Q. That is what you felt; isn't that right? 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. And the Union - Mr Zach Smith said to you, told you 15 that MPR is not paying the right rate? 16 A. That was brought up at the meeting at the Union 17 office. He didn't say that then. He just said that he 18 thought the men, two of my men had worked for them and he 19 said that they were owed money from MPR and he was hoping 20 to be able to get that money for them. 21 22 Q. But the Union representatives were the ones that 23 informed you both when you spoke to Mr Smith and at the 24 meeting, they were the ones who said that MPR wasn't paying 25 the right rate; correct? 26 A. I don't - I'm not sure. 27 28 Q. Who else could have said it? 29 A. There were so many people at the meeting, there were 30 50 people there. 31 32 Q. Yes, I know. 33 A. And a lot of the others brought it up and said they 34 mustn't be paying the right rate. 35 36 Q. Yes, I know that, but the Union, Mr Smith was the one 37 that said to you that there were past employees that 38 weren't getting paid the right rate, wasn't it? 39 A. Yes. 40 41 Q. It came from the Union, didn't it? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. You don't go around telling people what rates you 45 charge, do you? 46 A. No. 47


1 Q. Right, okay, so you were making assumptions, but the 2 Union was telling you that MPR wasn't paying the right 3 rate; correct? 4 A. Correct. 5 6 Q. And the Union - that's the reason why you told Jason 7 from Mayfair Homes, "Be careful, the Union has been trying 8 to get MPR for not paying the correct money"? 9 A. That's right. 10 11 Q. Right. Because the Union told you that; correct? 12 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. But you had no direct knowledge of that at all, 15 did you? 16 A. No. 17 18 Q. And the fact of the matter is you didn't even know 19 what MPR had signed up to pay their employees at all, 20 did you? 21 A. No. 22 23 Q. Because you assumed that they were paying what you had 24 to pay? 25 A. That's right, yes. 26 27 Q. Because you believed that what the Union were doing 28 was getting every single scaffolding company in the ACT to 29 pay the same rates; correct? 30 A. That's right, yes. 31 32 Q. So that there was a minimum amount that you would have 33 to charge out at -- 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. -- in order to meet that minimum EBA wage rate 37 together with the entitlements; correct? 38 A. Yes. 39 40 Q. In other words, there was a minimum fixed rate that 41 you couldn't go under otherwise you'd be losing money; 42 correct? 43 A. That's right, yes. 44 45 Q. In effect, the Union was fixing prices, fixing 46 a bottom price for the market for scaffolders in the ACT; 47 correct?


1 A. No. 2 3 Q. They weren't? 4 A. No. 5 6 Q. Well, what is different about what -- 7 A. We had to fix our own price -- 8 9 Q. I understand that -- 10 A. -- to make sure we covered the agreement. 11 12 Q. That's right, but that fixed price was something that 13 you believed every scaffolding company was going to comply 14 with; correct? 15 A. Everyone would have their different. 16 17 Q. The reason why you were upset about it was if the 18 company was charging a price under that then they mustn't 19 be playing the game properly; correct? 20 A. Correct. 21 22 Q. So you wanted the Union to go around and do something 23 about it; correct? 24 A. No, I didn't. 25 26 Q. You didn't? 27 A. No, I didn't. When I spoke to Jason I said, "There's 28 no bad blood. I'm just telling you, because we've done 29 a lot of work, just be careful." 30 31 Q. You were saying be careful because the Union was 32 spreading a rumour about MPR; correct? 33 A. No. 34 35 Q. It was no more than that as far as you directly knew; 36 correct? 37 A. Everybody at the meetings couldn't be wrong. 38 39 Q. No, no, no, but it was based on - you didn't have 40 facts upon which to base what you were saying? 41 A. No, I didn't have facts. 42 43 Q. No. It was based on what the Union had told you; 44 correct? 45 A. No. It was also based on the men who worked for them 46 and worked for me, the difference in hourly rates. 47


1 Q. I know, but that was what the Union told you, isn't 2 it? 3 A. That's what the men who worked for me - they showed me 4 their pay slips and then I - and then they compared it to 5 the pay slips they get from me and then they could see the 6 difference in the hourly rates. 7 8 Q. But you don't know what rates MPR was supposed to be 9 charging at that time, though, do you? 10 A. I don't know what they were charging. 11 12 Q. You don't know what EBA they had signed up to, do you? 13 A. No. 14 15 Q. Right. So they might have been correct rates for all 16 you knew? 17 A. Yes, maybe, yes. 18 19 Q. You've got no way of knowing otherwise, do you? 20 A. No, only by the pay slips or the hourly rate. 21 22 Q. I know but that might have been the correct pay slip 23 for that person; correct? 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. You don't do any of the paperwork back at the office, 27 do you? 28 A. I do a lot of it, but I've got a lady who works for 29 me, she how does most of it. 30 31 Q. These audits - do you like doing these audits for the 32 Union? 33 A. No, she does the audits. 34 35 Q. You don't like them, do you? 36 A. No. 37 38 Q. You'd rather dismiss them, hey? Do you think the 39 Union should be entitled to look at your books? 40 A. Yes, it's in the Award, it's in the agreement. 41 42 Q. I know it's in there but do you think it's a good 43 idea? 44 A. Well, I didn't even know it was in there, to tell you 45 the truth, I didn't read -- 46 47 Q. Do you think the Union should be looking at your


1 books? 2 A. They've never looked at them before. 3 4 Q. Why should they? 5 A. Because it's in the agreement. 6 7 Q. I know, but forget about the agreement for a minute: 8 do you think it's a good idea? 9 A. Well, I suppose it's a good idea if it keeps everybody 10 paying the right money to the agreement. 11 12 Q. Do you like the Union telling you what you should 13 charge? 14 A. That's in the agreement. 15 16 Q. Do you like the Union telling you what to charge? 17 18 MR AGIUS: I object to this. 19 20 THE WITNESS: I've got to charge what's in the agreement. 21 22 MR AGIUS: I object to this. There is no evidence at all 23 from this witness that the Union told him what he should 24 charge. In fact, his evidence is to the contrary. That 25 question carries a premise that the Union was telling this 26 witness what he should charge and he's denied it, so it is 27 an improper question, with respect. 28 29 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Morison? 30 31 MR MORISON: Q. These EBA agreements with the Union you 32 have been signing, you just go along with them, don't you? 33 A. Sometimes I talk to some of the others. We've all 34 got - if we don't sign it we don't know what the 35 consequences will be, so I sign it in good faith. 36 37 Q. What do you mean by that? 38 A. Well, I don't want any - we mainly do, like, 39 residential and we have no problems with the Union at all. 40 We never see the Union. It's only on the bigger jobs that 41 they're a problem but we just sign what we need to to just 42 keep going. 43 44 Q. Because you don't want any of the consequences of not 45 signing; correct? 46 A. We don't get any consequences. 47


1 Q. What are the consequences? 2 A. Pardon? 3 4 Q. You are avoiding the consequences by agreeing with the 5 Union agreement, going along with it to avoid the 6 consequences; that's what you just told us, isn't it? 7 A. No, it's not. 8 9 Q. Yes, it is. You just said "to avoid the 10 consequences", sir. What are the consequences if you don't 11 sign? 12 A. There's no consequences for us. 13 14 Q. I know, that's because you've signed, but you have 15 heard about all the other consequences that happen to 16 people that don't sign? 17 A. That doesn't concern me because I've signed. 18 19 Q. I know that but you have heard about it through the 20 industry? 21 A. I've heard about it, yes. 22 23 Q. All right. What happens? Tell us what happens? 24 A. I don't know because I don't - I'm not interested in 25 it. 26 27 Q. What do people tell you? 28 A. I've only - it's only what I heard. I don't -- 29 30 Q. I know but what have you heard? What have you heard? 31 A. I've heard that one particular company hasn't paid the 32 right money and the Union are trying to get the backpay for 33 those men. 34 35 Q. No, no, no, let's be honest, sir. What have you heard 36 around the industry about the consequences of what happens 37 if you don't sign up to the EBA? If you don't sign up 38 isn't it the fact that the Union will come around and cause 39 problems at your sites and cause you financial problems? 40 A. Not as far as I know, because, like I said, I've not 41 been on any jobs where that's happened. 42 43 Q. What about the commercial jobs where you said they 44 have these problems? 45 A. I don't do many commercial jobs. 46 47 Q. What about the ones you told about where there are


1 problems? A minute ago you just told us about the 2 commercial ones where there are problems. 3 A. They're not commercial. Well, they're on other jobs; 4 that has nothing to do with me. 5 6 Q. What do you mean? 7 A. I think they have stoppages and things like that, I'm 8 not sure, because it doesn't affect me. 9 10 Q. Why do you raise stoppages if you're not sure? Are 11 you trying to protect -- 12 A. You raised it. 13 14 Q. Are you trying to protect yourself because you think 15 that if you say something against the Union, it will come 16 down on you like a tonne of bricks? 17 A. No, it's not, it's not. 18 19 Q. Why did you say a moment ago there were problems on 20 commercial sites? Do you want me to read it back to you? 21 Do you want me to read it back to you? 22 A. Yes, you can. 23 24 Q. Line 16. 25 26 MR AGIUS: What page, please? 27 28 MR MORISON: Q. Line 29, page 1578: 29 30 Q. These EBA agreements with the Union you 31 have been signing, you just go along with 32 them, don't you? 33 A. Sometimes I talk to some of the others. 34 We've all got - if we don't sign it we 35 don't know what the consequences will be, 36 so I sign it in good faith. 37 38 Q. What do you mean by that? 39 A. Well, I don't want any - we mainly do, 40 like, residential and we have no problems 41 with the Union at all. We never see the 42 Union. It's only on the bigger jobs that 43 they're a problem but we just sign what we 44 need to to just keep going. 45 46 Q. Because you don't want any of the 47 consequences of not signing; correct?


1 A. We don't get any consequences. 2 3 Do you remember giving that evidence? 4 A. Yes, I do. 5 6 Q. Right. You are talking about consequences; correct? 7 A. No consequences to us. 8 9 Q. You keep on saying that. I understand that. 10 I understand you're concerned about consequences that you 11 will get perhaps if you say something now, because you've 12 got all these Union lawyers in front of you looking at you 13 now, haven't you? 14 A. I haven't got a problem with the Union. 15 16 Q. No, of course not, and you don't want to have a 17 problem with the Union, do you? 18 A. They don't affect us in the sort of work we do, where 19 we work. 20 21 Q. Because you signed up to the EBA with them, 22 didn't you? 23 A. We signed the agreement and we pay the right money. 24 25 Q. You signed the agreement and you've got - are all your 26 employees members of the Union? 27 A. No. 28 29 Q. They're not? 30 A. They're not, no. 31 32 Q. You don't get any - you don't think that they should 33 become Union members? 34 A. It's their choice. 35 36 Q. Their choice. 37 A. It's not law. 38 39 Q. It's not law to sign a Union EBA either, is it? 40 A. Well, I don't know. 41 42 Q. You don't know? 43 A. No. 44 45 Q. Has anyone told you you've got a choice? 46 A. No. 47


1 Q. You feel that if you don't sign it, you might even be 2 breaking the law? 3 A. No. 4 5 Q. Well, you feel you've got to sign it, though? 6 A. I've signed it so that we just keep doing our job. 7 8 Q. You've got no choice but to sign it, do you? 9 A. Well, I don't know - no, I didn't think you had 10 a choice until we signed it. 11 12 Q. Right. 13 A. We agreed that what was in it was fair and reasonable 14 and we signed it. 15 16 Q. You have been in the scaffolding industry for 30 years 17 and you don't think you've got a choice but to sign the 18 Union EBA; correct? 19 A. No. 20 21 Q. Is that correct? 22 A. Yes. 23 24 Q. And that's because you've heard about the consequences 25 in the industry, haven't you? 26 A. Yes, I have. 27 28 Q. You don't want to talk about it, do you? 29 A. I don't know firsthand what they are. 30 31 Q. I'm not asking you if you know them firsthand, sir, 32 I am asking you what you've heard. What have you heard? 33 Tell us what you've heard? 34 A. I've heard that jobs are stopped, but -- 35 36 Q. Right. Hang on, hang on a second. Jobs are stopped. 37 You've heard that, haven't you? 38 A. Yes. They might not be because of the agreement, they 39 might be -- 40 41 Q. But hang on -- 42 A. It may be because of other things. 43 44 Q. I know. I know. I'm not saying you've got firsthand 45 knowledge, sir, but you have heard that one of the 46 consequences, right, that you've heard around the traps is, 47 "If I don't sign this" --


1 A. No. No. 2 3 Q. Hang on. Hang on. Some of the consequences are jobs 4 are stopped; correct? 5 A. Not through the agreement, through other items. 6 I don't know if they're stopped by agreement or not. 7 I know they're stopped for different reasons but I don't 8 know if they're stopped by the agreement. 9 10 Q. I understand that, sir, but the point is you signed 11 the agreement so that you don't even have this as 12 a potential consequence; isn't that right? 13 A. That's right, yes. 14 15 Q. Right. There are stoppages, that's one you've heard. 16 What about the Union going in for safety issues? Another 17 one? 18 A. Safety issues? 19 20 Q. Yes. 21 A. Yes. 22 23 Q. Heard that? Yes? Yes? That's a "Yes"? 24 A. Yes. 25 26 Q. They go in and, well, just cause unrest, cause 27 financial problems for the company, don't they? 28 A. I don't know. 29 30 Q. But you've heard about stoppages; correct? 31 A. Yes. 32 33 Q. And safety issues, going in; correct? 34 A. Yes. 35 36 Q. And you don't want to have to think about potential 37 consequences from the Union, so you sign the EBA because 38 you believe you've got no choice; correct? 39 A. Ah, yes. 40 41 MR MORISON: I have nothing further. 42 43 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Agius? 44 45 MR AGIUS: Thank you. 46 47


1 <EXAMINATION BY MR AGIUS: 2 3 MR AGIUS: Q. When you say you don't have a choice, you 4 do understand, don't you, that you can, if you choose, not 5 sign it? 6 A. I didn't know that. We just - I just went along with 7 what the majority of the scaffold companies would do, so we 8 all stuck together on this. 9 10 Q. So you wanted to be like the other scaffolding 11 companies? 12 A. That's it, yes. 13 14 Q. And if you are like the other scaffolding companies 15 then you sign the EBA? 16 A. That's right, yes. 17 18 Q. But if you don't want to be like the other scaffolding 19 companies then you don't have to sign the EBA. Do you 20 agree with that? 21 A. I don't know. I'd never even thought of not signing 22 it. 23 24 Q. You were asked some questions about your EBA. 25 A. Yes. 26 27 Q. One of them was about what was called the 28 Creative Safety Initiative Trust and what you knew about 29 that. Can I put it in more simple words for you. 30 Stripping away those words, do you know that the Union 31 operates a training facility? 32 A. Yes. 33 34 Q. Do you know that it's behind the Union offices? 35 A. Yes. 36 37 Q. Have you used that training facility? 38 A. No. 39 40 Q. Do you know that people in the industry do use the 41 training facility? 42 A. Yes. 43 44 Q. When you haven't used that training facility are there 45 other training facilities that you have used? 46 A. Just at tech, ACT TAFE. 47

.30/07/2015 CFMEU ACT 1584 H I WATT (Mr Agius) Transcript produced by DTI

1 Q. So if your workers need particular cards, white cards, 2 or if they need asbestos cards, or other cards like that, 3 you just go to whichever training facility you wish? 4 A. Yes. There's Asbestos Awareness out at Dickson and 5 the white cards were at the CIT in Belconnen. 6 7 Q. And when you say Dickson, are you referring to the 8 Union's training facility? 9 A. I'm not too sure what it is; I'm not too sure. 10 11 Q. But you've never had any difficulty from the Union -- 12 A. No. 13 14 Q. -- about which training facility you use? 15 A. No. 16 17 Q. You were asked about whether you were aware of 18 something called the Construction Charitable Works. Were 19 you aware that the Union supports a particular charity that 20 provides welfare services for the benefit of workers in the 21 industry? 22 A. No, I didn't know. 23 24 Q. Just a couple of matters of clarification. You do 25 recall telling Zach Smith - and this is in your 26 statement - that MPR Scaffolding were hard to beat because 27 their prices were much lower than yours? 28 A. Yes. 29 30 Q. And in that conversation did you say to him words to 31 the effect, "Look, I can't see how they can be paying EBA 32 rates if their prices are so low? 33 A. No, I didn't mention that. 34 35 Q. Did he say anything about that to you? 36 A. No. He just said to me that the guys that he thought 37 were owed money, he was hoping to be able to get that money 38 for them. 39 40 Q. I think you have told us this, that some people who 41 used to work for MPR worked for you? 42 A. Two of them, yes. 43 44 Q. And they showed you their pay slips? 45 A. Yes, and the Union, they showed the Union as well. 46 47 Q. And the pay slips that related to what they were doing


1 at MPR reflected pay rates less than what you were paying? 2 A. Yes. Yes. Yes. 3 4 Q. And you knew you were paying EBA rates? 5 A. Yes. 6 7 Q. Did you form the view from that that maybe MPR is not 8 paying its EBA rates? 9 A. I always thought they were in the agreement, I didn't 10 know they weren't, so I thought they would have to be 11 paying the same rate. 12 13 Q. And when you saw the pay slips did you form a view 14 that perhaps they were not paying EBA rates? 15 A. Yes. 16 17 Q. And did that to you seem to explain why it might be 18 that they were quoting so much lower than you? 19 A. Yes. 20 21 Q. Can I suggest to you that in one of the conversations 22 you had with Zach Smith, you did speak about safety 23 concerns in residential work? 24 A. No, never, never. 25 26 MR AGIUS: Thank you. Thank you, Mr Watt. 27 28 THE COMMISSIONER: Thank you, Mr Agius. Mr Scruby? 29 30 MR SCRUBY: No, Commissioner. 31 32 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Watt may be excused I presume? 33 34 MR SCRUBY: Yes, Commissioner. 35 36 THE COMMISSIONER: Mr Watt, you attended here today 37 because of a summons. You are excused from any further 38 attendance on that summons. Thank you very much for coming 39 along and helping in the way you have. You can leave the 40 witness box now. 41 42 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 43 44 <THE WITNESS WITHDREW 45 46 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes, Mr Stoljar? 47


1 MR STOLJAR: Commissioner, that concludes the witnesses 2 for today and, indeed, the public hearings in Canberra. 3 4 THE COMMISSIONER: Yes. Tomorrow we will have a private 5 hearing and then we will resume public hearings in Sydney 6 on Tuesday of next week. 7 8 MR STOLJAR: Yes. 9 10 THE COMMISSIONER: Is there anything anyone wants to raise 11 before we adjourn, before the hearing finishes? Very well. 12 The hearing will adjourn into a private hearing tomorrow. 13 The public hearings will resume in Sydney on 4 August at 14 10am. 15 16 AT 3.05PM THE COMMISSION WAS ADJOURNED TO TUESDAY, 4 AUGUST 17 2015 AT 10AM 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47


Web viewYou were formerly an employee of MPR Scaffolding? 6 A. Yes ... what's the word? They're not...

Documents

Transcript of Web viewYou were formerly an employee of MPR Scaffolding? 6 A. Yes ... what's the word? They're not...