Description

Introduction 

Finnegan Constructions is a residential development company that builds apartment complexes in the Stanwell Council district. It employs 58 male staff from the area with different construction related trades and professions. The local market for these workers is highly competitive and Finnegan has had to employ 12 new apprentices in the reporting period because 17 employees have left, mostly to work for rival organisations or establish their own businesses. The company has increased worker pay rates and implemented a monthly rostered day off to try to retain its existing staff.

Fair Work Commission 

One employee, David Dawson, resigned from the organisation and filed a workplace harassment claim in the Fair Work Commission. His claim alleged he was discriminated against by his co-workers on the basis of his age. David further alleged that because he was the only worker older than 50 years of age (everybody else is aged between 30 and 50) he was the target of humiliating age related jokes from the others. 

The Fair Work Commission upheld David’s claim and ordered Finnegan Constructions to pay him $4,400 in compensation. The Commission also ordered Finnegan to update its anti-discrimination policy and provide anti-discrimination training to all employees. The company has complied with the Commission’s orders.

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission 

David also lodged a series of complaints to a number of government authorities about Finnegan’s operations. On the basis of one such complaint, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) instituted proceedings in the Federal Court against Finnegan Constructions for alleged anticompetitive conduct involving misuse of market power and exclusive dealings. 

The ACCC alleged that Finnegan became aware that a group of local builders were planning to establish a competing development company. In response to this competitive threat, the ACCC alleged senior Finnegan executives told suppliers and contractors that if they were involved with the new development company they would have their business with Finnegan substantially reduced or withdrawn.

The ACCC alleged that Finnegan engaged in this conduct for the purpose of deterring or preventing a new entrant in the development market in the Stanwell district, or substantially lessening competition in that market. The case is listed to be heard by the Federal Court in four months.