‘Expectations for those heading to Australia to work for Multiplex’
1. Multiplex have an excellent reputation in Australia for being a ‘fair’, reputable builder. They aim to employ good people, pay well but expect a lot!
2. It is highly likely that middle management will expect 12 hours + per day. Get stuck in, but set your stall out from the start. My priorities were academic work, gaining varied site practice and experiencing Australia – not working all hours to get my line manager promoted.
3. They push the contractors hard. Some bully, some build relationships, which was interesting to observe.
4. They work in fast paced environment. I found processes, general administration and management of pers to be lacking in comparison to what I’m used to. They were clearly focused on building stuff on time and making money $$$$ !
5. What we consider as unethical practice happens every day on site! (in WA anyway)
6. Attitudes towards health and safety can be extremely varied. Be mindful of the term “that’s a Saturday job”.
7. Workers unions are very strong and powerful in Australia. The majority of Multiplex projects are union sites which present their own management battles.
Give me a bell if you want to discuss anything further: +61 498 145 474
Holdfast Training Services Trial Blog 
Mike,
You’re still getting Friday beers though right?
Not for me – big mortgage and even bigger mrs. I wouldn’t dare 😳
Haven’t they taken your login off you yet Fran? Van Wilder of Chatham…
I don’t know if that’s a compliment 😄
Thanks Michael,
I accept all of the above as observations of fact so this is not a dig or criticism at all, however, I would caution that reviewers will question candidates at review based on incidental evidence (a comment about aggressive management, dubious tender practices or a photo in a report that shows unsafe access). The only acceptable response is an expression of personal endeavor within your sphere influence to ensure appropriate behavior through diplomatic discussion, example and education. Recognising and discussing the issues raised at 3, 5 and 6 is a strength as long as you are ready to explain your own position and actions (and they align with your PEIs code of conduct and ethics). This blog is a useful entre to the topic and presents opportunity to note that, tempting as it might be to suggest you should just accept local practice lest you be thought of as a pedantic a*sehole, this is not an acceptable approach.
Thanks Richard. Very thought provoking response. I found myself in some very difficult situations, not least in front of the CEO giving open and honest feedback.
In terms of my actions when witnessing unethical/unsafe practices, I feel confident justifying my actions to a board. It was difficult – lets not forget we are inexperienced engineers operating in a foreign country under different legislation. Valuable experience.
Mike – completely agree with your points. The management of people, on the whole, is based on the yearly pay review and bonus – those people that cannot be tempted by more money or the addition of “senior” to their job title leave. When I first arrived in the office, I was told to expect to work a minimum of 50 hours per week, plus 2 Saturdays a month.
As a concept I have found leadership almost completely lacking on site. It is my opinion that the 5 managers (Project, Site, Contracts, Design and Services) should maintain a common, external message. They can and should have internal discussions (and disagree where required), but then pull together in order to support the PM’s direction. This does not happen, there are some strong personalities that seem to value their own opinion over the benefits of being a “team player”. It is only the PM’s first job in the role so hopefully she will grow into it and the next project will benefit.
On the issue of ethics and safety, I have found these difficult areas as well.
Safety – genuinely dangerous activities should be stopped immediately and the appropriate channels used to investigate and solve any systemic issues that caused individuals to feel mandated to complete work unsafely rather than taking more time to complete in with reduced risk. However there are large grey areas – take for example the use of hearing protection, it is not mandated on Multiplex sites and is up to the sub-contractor’s SWMS (Safe Working Method Statement) to specify which tasks require them and which do not; therefore what do you do if the individual is not required to wear them, but personally you believe they should?
Ethics – as with safety, there are times when something is genuinely wrong and therefore you MUST try to prevent it from happening – I found myself in a difficult position when I was involved in a large variation and it appeared for a long time that Multiplex had deliberately added in staff costs but had no intention of filling the positions. After a discussion with the PM it transpired that the positions would be filled, but not immediately. But other times there are grey areas; what if the conventional wisdom and approach does not fit with your morals and ethics?
To answer both the questions from above, I am going to steal the words from Rich’s comment, you must personally “endeavor within your sphere influence to ensure appropriate behavior through diplomatic discussion, example and education”. However, this process must be two ways, you must be open to accepting the rationale behind the extant working method or practice.