Kwinana Grain Terminal workers consider two-week strike action ahead of ‘crucial’ meeting with CBH bosses

The State’s busy grain exporting program risks being thrown into disarray with workers at CBH Group’s Kwinana Grain Terminal considering a two-week strike starting from January 27. Maritime Union of Australia WA branch members and CBH port workers were this week weighing up whether to action the two week strike after first striking for four days between January 12 and 18. The strikes came after a year-long tussle over EBA negotiations between the MUA and CBH Group reached boiling point, despite both parties agreeing to a 5 per cent wage increase late last year. The groups originally notified CBH that they would strike again — for seven days — from January 27, one day after the Australia Day public holiday. They were expected to meet with CBH Group on Tuesday, January 24 to continue discussions about non-financial work-related claims. At the meeting, the MUA and CBH Group port workers were expected to notify CBH management of a second seven-day strike starting from the end of the first week of strikes on February 3. While the four days of non-consecutive strikes were understood to have had limited impact on CBH’s busy shipping stem from Kwinana Grain Terminal, two weeks of consecutive strike action at its biggest export port would be of major concern. CBH’s Daily Ship Roster shows there are four vessels scheduled to depart the port with more than 200,000t of wheat and canola collectively between January 27 and February 2. MUA WA branch assistant secretary Jeff Cassar said the bargaining representatives and CBH Group were “making progress” but there were “five or six” claims that weren’t completely resolved. He said a major sticking point was a push for the “right to representation” in disciplinary meetings, which originally meant staff could have a union representative present. “CBH hasn’t budged on that claim so in the past week, and so the committee has made more compromise and changed the claim,” Mr Cassar said. “It would mean employees have a right to representation but CBH has a right to revoke that right (on a case by case basis) if they (staff) are acting inappropriately. “This seems to be the one claim where both parties are inherently opposed.” Mr Cassar said negotiations started in late 2021 and continued “in good faith” throughout the year, with CBH agreeing to a 5 per cent pay increase for staff. He said some discussions were postponed until CBH handed down its annual results in December, which revealed a record annual surplus of $497.m to September 30. However, Mr Cassar said discussions “fell apart” at a meeting on December 15, when CBH allegedly reneged on eight clauses. A CBH spokesman last week said the industrial action was disappointing, and the shipping interruptions posed a threat to the both the State’s important grain industry and regional economies The company this week said negotiations were ongoing and productive. “CBH met with the bargaining representatives on Thursday, January 19 and had a productive meeting, with parties working through the non-financial claims,” the spokesman said. “We will continue to negotiate directly with the bargaining representatives and are meeting again on Tuesday, January 24. “We look forward to another productive meeting and working towards a final agreement.”