Answer extracted from the Creatures of the Industry podcast — listen to the full episode below.
How did the Longford Gas Plant disaster in 1998 create employment opportunities and change working conditions for construction workers in Gippsland?
After the explosion that killed five people, the remediation and reconstruction of the Longford Gas Plant became one of the most substantial construction jobs available to workers in the region. The state government invested heavily in the project, providing workers with improved conditions: 12-hour shifts, on-site accommodation at 90 Mile Beach, a dedicated canteen, and shuttle bus access across the massive facility.
Remediation work as rare opportunity
Terry Riggs secured work with Fleur Daniel on the remediation and construction phases that followed the 1998 disaster. He describes this as one of only half a dozen truly good jobs throughout his entire career in construction. The scale of the project was significant enough to absorb substantial numbers of skilled workers across multiple trades.
Though the state government's flooding of resources created the opportunity, it also came with trade-offs. Workers faced long 12-hour shifts punctuated by periods of little work, a pattern typical of large-scale industrial remediation where mobilization and demobilization cycles left gaps in productivity.
Infrastructure for the workforce
What distinguished this job from many others was the employer's provision of comprehensive support systems. Workers received accommodation directly on the 90 Mile Beach site, removing the burden of finding housing in the surrounding area. A canteen operated on-site, and a dedicated shuttle bus system transported workers across the sprawling facility.
As Riggs explains in Creatures of the Industry, the broader contrast between this project and others he worked on—particularly the casualized, de-unionized conditions on other major industrial projects—illustrates how state investment could temporarily reshape working standards. The Longford remediation represented a relatively protected employment environment, even if the work itself remained physically demanding.
"The majority of a construction worker's wage isn't his hourly rate. It's his overtime and other conditions. That's what I missed."
Terry Riggs — Scaffolder and Health and Safety Representative. With decades of experience in heavy industry across Victoria and Western Australia, Riggs worked as a health and safety representative under the Occupational Health and Safety Act introduced in 1985 and trained through an associate diploma at Holmesglen TAFE. He has worked on major projects including Shell refinery upgrades and Transfield shutdowns, and currently works at the Metro Tunnel in Melbourne.
Though the Longford project offered better infrastructure than many sites, the underlying economic reality for construction workers remained precarious. For a deeper exploration of how casualization and de-unionization shaped worker conditions on other major industrial projects in the same era, listen to Riggs discuss the Port Hedland industrial project, which operated under radically different labour practices.
See also
What were the working conditions and labour practices on a 2,000-person industrial project in Port Hedland during the late 1990s?
The Port Hedland project was highly casualized and de-unionized with no union solidarity whatsoever. Workers were paid at half a dozen different rates, some at significantly reduced wages compared to union-protected standards.
How did WorkCover compensation address the lost income and social isolation experienced by construction workers during extended work-related injuries?
While WorkCover paid enough to live on, the compensation could not replace the majority of a construction worker's wage, which comes from overtime and other conditions rather than the base hourly rate.
What impact did the Occupational Health and Safety Act introduced in 1985 have on workplace practices in Australian heavy industry?
Terry Riggs, working as a health and safety representative at Shell Refinery under the new legislation, wrote 12 pin notices on the job, and all but one were upheld by WorkSafe, demonstrating the Act's enforcement power.
Key takeaways
- The Longford Gas Plant remediation represented one of the few genuinely secure construction jobs Riggs encountered in his career, with state government backing ensuring substantial resources.
- On-site infrastructure—accommodation at 90 Mile Beach, canteen facilities, and shuttle transport—provided workers with practical support rarely available on other industrial projects.
- Despite improved conditions compared to casualized alternatives, the work still involved unpredictable 12-hour shifts with periods of minimal activity, reflecting the cyclical nature of large-scale remediation.
- The scale and organization of the Longford project stood in stark contrast to the de-unionized, multi-tiered wage structure of other major industrial sites in the same era.