❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice addresses a dispute between Leighton Contractors/Leighton Kumagai Joint Venture and the CMFEU regarding night-shift rates on the Southern Rail and MetroRail city projects. The Minister's response focuses on the contractor's obligation to meet the project deadline, suggesting flexibility in the work program to accommodate delays.
AnsweredQoN 1035Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
(1) On what grounds has the dispute arisen between the Government’s contractor for the southern rail project, Leighton Contractors, and the Construction, Mining, Forestry and Energy Union, and between the Government’s contractor for the MetroRail city project, Leighton Kumagai Joint Venture, and the CMFEU? (2) How many days have been lost to date as a result of this dispute and how far behind schedule are the respective projects? (3) Who will be responsible for the additional costs consequent upon the delays? Hon KEN TRAVERS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised as follows - (1) It is understood that the dispute centres on the interpretation of night-shift rates in the enterprise bargaining agreement. (2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
(2) How many days have been lost to date as a result of this dispute and how far behind schedule are the respective projects? (3) Who will be responsible for the additional costs consequent upon the delays? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised as follows - (1) It is understood that the dispute centres on the interpretation of night-shift rates in the enterprise bargaining agreement. (2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
(3) Who will be responsible for the additional costs consequent upon the delays? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised as follows - (1) It is understood that the dispute centres on the interpretation of night-shift rates in the enterprise bargaining agreement. (2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised as follows - (1) It is understood that the dispute centres on the interpretation of night-shift rates in the enterprise bargaining agreement. (2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised as follows - (1) It is understood that the dispute centres on the interpretation of night-shift rates in the enterprise bargaining agreement. (2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
(1) It is understood that the dispute centres on the interpretation of night-shift rates in the enterprise bargaining agreement. (2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
(2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
(2) How many days have been lost to date as a result of this dispute and how far behind schedule are the respective projects? (3) Who will be responsible for the additional costs consequent upon the delays? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised as follows - (1) It is understood that the dispute centres on the interpretation of night-shift rates in the enterprise bargaining agreement. (2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
(3) Who will be responsible for the additional costs consequent upon the delays? Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised as follows - (1) It is understood that the dispute centres on the interpretation of night-shift rates in the enterprise bargaining agreement. (2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
Hon KEN TRAVERS replied: I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised as follows - (1) It is understood that the dispute centres on the interpretation of night-shift rates in the enterprise bargaining agreement. (2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
I thank the member for some notice of this question. I am advised as follows - (1) It is understood that the dispute centres on the interpretation of night-shift rates in the enterprise bargaining agreement. (2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
(1) It is understood that the dispute centres on the interpretation of night-shift rates in the enterprise bargaining agreement. (2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
(2)-(3) The contractor’s obligation to complete the project by the end of October 2006 has not changed. Clearly, there is scope over the next two years to readjust the work program to make up time. It should be noted that 27 days were lost in industrial disputes during the construction of the Northbridge tunnel, yet the project was completed two months ahead of time.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.