On 15 May 2025, the Offshore Alliance took to Facebook to blame long-time union leaders Steve McCartney (AMWU) and Mick Buchan (CFMEU) for the continued exclusion of offshore construction workers on propelled vessels from the Construction Industry Portable Paid Long Service Leave Act 1985 (WA) (CIPLSL). Their post paints a picture of inaction, but it’s a narrative that falls apart under scrutiny—one built on selective history and strategic omissions.

Contrary to the Alliance’s portrayal, the truth is this: the AMWU, CFMEU, ETU, and MUA have all been instrumental in pushing for comprehensive reform to the Act, while the Alliance itself—half of which is the MUA—ignores that it is not the only union making these efforts. In fact, several other unions, like the AWU, have made no submission at all to the landmark 2023 independent review of the Act.

The Offshore Alliance implies that nothing has been done to address the unjust exclusion of offshore workers. This claim is demonstrably false.

In fact, the 2023 Independent Review of the CIPLSL Act, commissioned by the WA Government, makes a pivotal recommendation that reflects union lobbying: to remove the exclusion for construction work performed on ships and explicitly include offshore work within the Act’s coverage.

That reform didn’t come from nowhere—it came from detailed submissions by the AMWU, CFMEU, ETU, MUA and the WA union movements peak body Unions WA. One would expect the Offshore Alliance to acknowledge the MUA’s role, given that the MUA forms one half of the Alliance. Instead, they claim sole credit while disparaging the very leaders who supported these reforms from within the system.

The AMWU played an active role in supporting Unions WA’s written submission to the 2023 review of the CIPLSL Act. The submission represented the collective voice of all unions affiliated with Unions WA at the time — notably, the AWU was not among them. The AMWU not only contributed to the process but also formally endorsed and backed the Unions WA position, reinforcing its commitment to securing fair and lasting outcomes for construction workers.

Back in 2017 and 2018, the ETU and AMWU took proactive steps to advocate for workers involved in commissioning works on the Ichthys and Shell Prelude facilities. Both unions made formal submissions to MyLeave, arguing that these workers should be included in the CIPLSL scheme. Their efforts prompted MyLeave to commission former Fair Work Commissioner, Danny Cloghan of DC Consulting to conduct an independent review of the nature of the work. The outcome? The 53-page review concluded that the work being performed fell outside the scope of the scheme — a disappointing result, but one that came about only after strong union advocacy forced the issue onto the agenda.

The AMWU, ETU, CFMEU and MUA all actively engaged in the 2023 KPMG review of the CIPLSL Act, contributing both in-person and through detailed written stakeholder submissions. This hands-on involvement ensured that workers’ voices were heard and that the union’s deep industry knowledge helped shape the review’s direction and outcomes.

The Silence of the AWU

While the Offshore Alliance was quick to criticise, their partner union—the AWU—did not even make a submission to the review. This is particularly concerning given the AWU’s role in negotiating many substandard enterprise agreements in the offshore sector. If the AWU had devoted as much energy to legislative reform as it does to waving through inferior deals, perhaps we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

The Alliance’s Facebook outrage rings hollow when it omits their own inactivity through one of its key affiliates.

The Reality of MyLeave Governance

The Alliance also wrongly implies that MyLeave Board members McCartney and Buchan could have unilaterally amended legislation. This reflects a fundamental misunderstanding—or deliberate distortion—of how industrial law reform works.

The MyLeave Board is made up of seven members—three worker representatives, three employer representatives and an independent chair. Its role is administrative, not legislative. Only the WA Government can amend the Act. What McCartney, Buchan, and others have done is use their influence to support a full independent review and advocate through formal channels—something the Offshore Alliance should applaud, not condemn.

The Offshore Alliance’s Facebook post recycles old grievances while ignoring recent, tangible progress. The AMWU, CFMEU, ETU & MUA have not only advocated for reform—they’ve done the work. They’ve contributed to a robust policy review process, led legal cases (however challenging), and stood up for coverage of workers in increasingly complex industrial contexts.

The 2016 Sapura-Clough case, referenced by the Alliance as proof of inaction, was a legal failure born of outdated legislation—not union apathy. Our exposé on the matter reveals the deeper systemic issues at play, including jurisdictional grey zones and poor legislative drafting. Read the full story here.

Yet since then, it has been the AMWU, CFMEU, ETU, and MUA that have rolled up their sleeves to fix the problem, not just point fingers. They’ve submitted reform proposals, worked within governance frameworks, and advocated for change in public forums. Their efforts are documented in the 2023 review—whereas the Alliance’s main contribution seems to be retroactive credit-claiming and inflammatory posts.

Not every union needs to be involved in every battle. What matters is that unions work together to win the broader war against unsafe conditions, low wages, and poor working standards.

Conclusion: Time for Unity, Not Division

The Offshore Alliance’s Facebook post is a prime example of social media spin masquerading as advocacy. It dismisses years of genuine reform efforts by frontline unions and turns a blind eye to its own internal contradictions—namely the silence of the AWU and the active role of the MUA.

Unions like the AMWU, CFMEU, ETU and MUA didn’t just complain—they did the work. They provided detailed, technical, and practical proposals that are now reflected in the formal reform agenda for the Act.

Rather than undermining these efforts with half-truths, the Alliance should be using its platform to push the WA Government to implement the review’s recommendations. The real enemy isn’t in the union movement—it’s in the outdated legislation that still excludes too many workers.

If the Alliance wants to make a difference, they should start by working with their fellow unions, not against them.

Sources:

• Independent Review of the Construction Industry Portable Paid Long Service Leave Act 1985, KPMG, Nov 2023

You can read the full report below with key sections highlighted for your convenience.

Correction – 19.05.2025
Since the original post, this publication has been made aware that the Offshore Alliance did make a joint submission by the AWU/MWU. We are not too proud to issue a correction when new information is discovered or provided.

However, this does not change the premise of the story: that the Alliance should not be blaming the AMWU and CFMEU for the exclusion of some workers under the CIPLSL Act.