Key Takeaways
- The CFMEU is alleged to have used former professional boxers, including Trent Broadhurst and Eben Cox, to intimidate contractors during the demolition of the flood‑damaged Toombul shopping centre.
- Rosenlund Contractors testified that the union demanded the hiring of Broadhurst at a cost of over $60,000 for six months, despite his lack of actual construction work.
- Evidence suggests the union employed tactics such as falsely reporting unhygienic conditions to shut down work sites and pressured contractors to replace temporary cleaners with a union‑affiliated cleaner.
- Union officials reportedly sought to sideline manager Tim Fraser over a perceived personal slight against CFMEU assistant secretary Jade Ingham, illustrating a pattern of using personal grievances to exert leverage.
- Contractors described Jade Ingham as wielding considerable power, claiming he could “make or break” companies and maintained a “wall of dogs” list of individuals the union disfavored.
- The inquiry will continue with testimony from contractors involved in the $1.6 bn Toowoomba Bypass project, indicating the alleged conduct may be part of a broader pattern.
Background of the Inquiry
The Commission of Inquiry into the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union (CFMEU) convened in Queensland to examine allegations of coercive and unlawful conduct by the union on construction sites. The proceedings, presided over by Commissioner Stuart Wood KC, have drawn testimony from contractors, union officials, and company directors. The inquiry’s focus includes claims that the CFMEU used physical intimidation, fraudulent site shutdowns, and personal vendettas to force compliance with its demands. This particular session centered on the demolition of the Toombul shopping centre, a site severely damaged by the 2022 floods near Brisbane Airport.
Allegations of Intimidation via Boxers
Counsel assisting Eddy Gisonda SC outlined how the CFMEU allegedly employed former professional boxers as enforcers to intimidate contractors. Gisonda presented video footage of bouts featuring Trent Broadhurst and Eben Cox, emphasizing the boxers’ physical presence as a source of understandable fear. He argued that the union’s strategy relied on the perception that individuals with notable fighting ability could deter opposition simply by their appearance. The courtroom was shown clips intended to illustrate the union’s use of such “physical attributes” as a tool of pressure.
Testimony from Rosenlund Contractors
Ryan Rosenlund, a director of Rosenlund Contractors—the demolition firm responsible for tearing down the Toombul centre—provided direct evidence of the union’s demands. He recounted that during negotiations for a new enterprise bargaining agreement, CFMEU official Eben Cox insisted that the company hire Trent Broadhurst, a former boxer and union delegate. Rosenlund described the insistence as non‑negotiable, framing it as a condition that left the contractor with little choice but to comply or risk losing work on the site.
Details of Trent Broadhurst’s Role
According to Rosenlund, Broadhurst’s presence on site did not translate into productive labour. He stated that the former boxer was observed napping on multiple occasions and performed no demolition or construction tasks. Rosenlund quoted a comment he reportedly heard: “He wasn’t there to do any construction work, let’s put it that way.” This testimony supported the claim that Broadhurst’s primary function was to serve as a visible, intimidating figure rather than a genuine worker.
The Directive from Eben Cox
Rosenlund traced the order to hire Broadhurst back to a direct instruction from Eben Cox, who identified himself as a former boxer and CFMEU official. Cox allegedly declared that the new rates Broadhurst would be paid were mandatory, warning that failure to comply would result in the contractor being barred from the site altogether: “If you don’t start, you won’t pick up a shovel on the site again.” Rosenlund characterized this as an existential threat to his business, underscoring the perceived severity of the union’s leverage.
Alleged Site Shutdown Tactics
Beyond the hiring demand, Rosenlund alleged that Broadhurst actively contributed to unsanitary conditions to fabricate a pretext for halting work. He claimed that on one occasion Broadhurst placed toilet paper on the floor of the site’s toilet block, made it appear dirty, and then used the alleged lack of hygienic facilities as justification to shut down operations. Rosenlund summed up the situation by asserting that Broadhurst “wasn’t there to do any construction work” and that his actions were aimed at creating excuses to stop progress.
Pressure to Hire Union Cleaner
In conjunction with the Broadhurst episode, the CFMEU reportedly pressured Rosenlund to replace an overnight temporary cleaner with a full‑time employee who was a union member. Rosenlund expressed dissatisfaction with the union‑appointed cleaner, remarking, “I don’t think she was particularly skilled.” This demand appeared designed to unionize the site’s support staff while displacing a contractor‑chosen worker, reinforcing the union’s influence over ancillary services on the project.
Attempts to Remove Manager Tim Fraser
Neile Rosenlund, Ryan’s father and a senior figure nearing retirement, testified that the union also sought to sideline manager Tim Fraser. He explained that Fraser had inadvertently mentioned a name in correspondence back in 2016; that individual was apparently an enemy of CFMEU assistant secretary Jade Ingham. Neile asserted that Fraser’s comment was innocent, yet the union took offence and attempted to prevent Fraser from attending the Toombul site or speaking with union members.
Neile Rosenlund’s Testimony on Union Power
Neile Rosenlund described his dealings with Jade Ingham as “extremely difficult,” contending that any perceived slight against Ingham could trigger union reprisals. He warned that upsetting Ingham could lead to losing future work, as delegates or organisers might find issues on a job. Neile quoted Ingham’s alleged claim of possessing a “wall of dogs” in his office—metaphorically referring to a list of individuals the union disfavored—suggesting that Ingham believed he held unilateral power to “make or break companies like ours.”
Jade Ingham’s Influence and “Wall of Dogs”
The testimony painted Jade Ingham as a central figure wielding substantial authority within the CFMEU’s Queensland branch. Contractors depicted him as someone who could dictate site access, influence hiring decisions, and retaliate against those who crossed him personally or professionally. The “wall of dogs” metaphor encapsulated a perceived blacklist used to intimidate firms and individuals deemed unfavorable, reinforcing the notion that the union’s power extended beyond formal negotiations into personal and reputational realms.
Implications and Next Steps
The evidence presented thus far indicates a pattern where the CFMEU allegedly blends industrial muscle with personal grievances to exert control over contractors. Should the inquiry substantiate these claims, it could prompt regulatory scrutiny, potential legal repercussions for union officials, and calls for stricter oversight of union‑contractor interactions on public infrastructure projects. The inquiry is set to continue with testimony from contractors involved in the $1.6 bn Toowoomba Bypass project, which may reveal whether similar tactics were employed elsewhere, thereby shaping the broader understanding of union conduct in Queensland’s construction sector.