Mark Irving KC spent 20 months as CFMEU administrator facing death threats, removing over 200 officials, and negotiating nearly 1,500 enterprise agreements. He resigned in April 2026, halfway through his term. Michael Crosby AM took over on 22 May. Here is an honest account of what the administration achieved, why Irving left, and what the change in leadership means for builders nationally.

When Mark Irving KC was appointed administrator of the CFMEU’s Construction and General Division on 23 August 2024, the brief was as difficult as any in Australian industrial relations history.

The union had been placed under federal administration following the Nine Newspapers and 60 Minutes ‘Building Bad’ investigation, which documented corruption, organised crime links, and coercion across the construction division in Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland. The legislation enabling the administration gave Irving broad powers: to remove officials, audit financial records, restructure branches, and report publicly on findings. The administration was established for up to five years.

Irving was a barrister, not a union official. He was being asked to take control of one of Australia’s most militant and historically resistant organisations, with the explicit mandate to make it lawful.

Twenty months later, he resigned. The announcement came on 29 April 2026. His resignation took effect on 1 June. On 22 May, the Fair Work Commission appointed Michael Crosby AM as his replacement.

For builders operating nationally, the leadership change matters. The administration directly affects the union that represents workers on construction sites across every state. Understanding what has changed and what has not is practical, not political.

What Irving Actually Did

The Fair Work Commission’s General Manager Murray Furlong outlined the achievements of Irving’s administration in his statement confirming the resignation. They are worth reading carefully, because they document what 20 months of reform actually looks like in practice.

Irving commissioned major investigative reports into each of the three most affected states. Geoffrey Watson SC’s ‘Rotting from the Top’ report documented corruption and criminal influence in the Victorian branch during the Setka era. A separate report examined violence in the Queensland construction industry. A third examined criminal conduct and corruption in the NSW divisional branch. These were not internal reviews. They were formal, evidence-based investigations that fed into both state and federal proceedings.

Over 200 officers, staff and delegates departed the union during the administration period. Some left through formal disciplinary processes. Others resigned. The CCF Victoria noted immediately after the administration commenced that 270 union officials had been removed from office, including at least 123 in Victoria alone.

Over 200 officers, staff and delegates departed the CFMEU during Irving’s 20-month administration. The Fair Work Commission described his contribution as significant, in often very challenging circumstances.

Irving also oversaw the negotiation of approximately 1,450 enterprise agreements with employers between August 2024 and April 2026. That is 3.5 agreements per working day. The volume matters because enterprise agreements govern pay rates, conditions and site practices for workers on the projects builders are managing. Having those agreements proceed through a reformed process rather than the previous pressure-driven model is a direct change to the operating environment on sites.

New governance structures were established across the division: a national statement of expectations for staff, a whistleblower and complaints procedure, a menacing behaviours policy, an industrial mediators policy, a behaviour change policy addressing misogyny in the industry, and a national integrity and education unit. These are structural changes that outlast any individual administrator.

Irving also cooperated with regulatory and law enforcement bodies across the country, establishing a process to receive complaints and make referrals to those bodies where appropriate.

The Personal Cost

The human dimension of Irving’s tenure should not be glossed over.

During his time as administrator, Irving received death threats. The federal government spent millions of dollars funding his personal security. That is not a footnote. It is a measure of the resistance he encountered and the environment in which he was operating.

Irving was a barrister stepping into an organisation with deep institutional culture, powerful internal factions, and documented links to organised crime. The resignation at the halfway point of a five-year administration was described in reporting at the time as a shock departure. The official framing was that the first phase of reform, the structural clean-up, was complete, and that a different skill set was needed for the implementation phase that follows.

Irving will remain involved as Senior Counsel to the CFMEU, providing continuity. That is a deliberate arrangement, not a clean break.

Why the Change in Leadership

The official explanation for the leadership transition is that the administration has moved from phase one to phase two.

Phase one was the clean-up: removing corrupt officials, commissioning investigations, establishing governance frameworks, and stopping the most egregious conduct. Irving, as a barrister with industrial relations expertise, was suited to that work.

Phase two is described as embedding those achievements and beginning a different kind of reform. Michael Crosby’s framing on appointment was direct: new personnel are now moving into place to implement the systems and processes required to ensure the union can operate lawfully, ethically, and eventually democratically.

The word ‘eventually’ in that statement is worth noting. Democratic control, meaning the union being run by its members rather than an administrator, remains the stated end goal. But it is not imminent. The administration runs for up to five years. Crosby’s appointment extends the process, it does not accelerate its conclusion.

The administration of the CFMEU Construction and General Division runs for up to five years. Michael Crosby’s mandate is to embed the reforms Irving established and move the union toward eventually returning to democratic member control.

Who Is Michael Crosby

Michael Crosby AM is a different profile from Irving. Where Irving was a barrister operating in the adversarial mode of investigation and removal, Crosby brings five decades of experience as a union official. He had been serving as interim administrator between Irving’s resignation taking effect and his formal appointment on 22 May 2026.

His framing of the role is explicitly about the next phase: implementation, systems, processes, and working toward the union operating as a genuine member-led organisation. The Australian Constructors Association has long argued that meaningful reform requires not just removing corrupt individuals but resetting the culture permanently, and that this requires further legislative reform for long-term industrial stability. Crosby’s appointment is a signal that the administration is moving in that direction.

What This Means for Builders on the Ground

The practical impact of the CFMEU administration on construction sites has been real, if uneven.

In Victoria, where the administration commenced with the immediate removal of over 120 officials, site conditions on major projects changed materially. The CCF Victoria documented a reduction in coercive site behaviours and noted that right-of-entry practices had become more compliant. The Queensland inquiry has heard evidence about the impact of union conduct on major projects, including claims about disruptions to the Cross River Rail project.

Nationally, the 1,450 enterprise agreements negotiated during Irving’s tenure represent a significant body of new industrial instruments that were negotiated without the pressure and alleged coercion that characterised some previous agreement-making. For builders managing EBAs, the process under administration has generally been more predictable.

The administration’s cooperation with law enforcement has resulted in proceedings against individuals in multiple states.

What has not changed is the fundamental industrial framework. The CFMEU remains the dominant union on commercial and civil construction sites nationally. Enterprise agreements remain the mechanism governing wages and conditions. The administration changed who runs the union and how. It has not changed the basic architecture of industrial relations in the sector.

What the Administration Has Not Fixed

The Australian Constructors Association has been consistent on this point. The administration alone is not a permanent solution. The structural issues that allowed misconduct to flourish, including weak accountability mechanisms, poor procurement practices and an industrial relations framework that tolerated coercion, require legislative reform to address permanently.

The Fair Work Commission’s General Manager made a similar point in his statement on Irving’s resignation. All major participants in the building and construction industry must actively contribute to eradicate inappropriate and illegal conduct. That includes Tier 1 builders, their clients and funders, major contractors, employer associations, other unions, law enforcement agencies and regulators, as well as state and Commonwealth governments. The administrator alone cannot fix the issues that have been identified.

That is a direct statement from the regulator. The administration has been a necessary intervention. It is not a substitute for systemic reform.

The Fair Work Commission’s General Manager has been explicit: the administrator alone cannot fix the issues identified. All major participants in the industry, including builders, contractors, and governments, must contribute.

What Comes Next

The administration continues under Crosby for the remainder of its term, which runs to at least August 2029. The six-monthly reports to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations will continue, providing a public record of progress.

In Queensland, the state Commission of Inquiry under Stuart Wood KC continues independently. Its final report to the Queensland Government is due 31 July 2026. The Queensland and federal processes are legally distinct but will reinforce each other. Whatever the Queensland inquiry recommends about building codes, procurement reform and site conduct will sit alongside the federal administration’s ongoing national reform program.

For builders, the honest position is this. The CFMEU administration has made the operating environment more predictable and less coercive on many sites. The worst conduct that was documented in the Building Bad investigation has been substantially disrupted. But the reform is not complete and the new administrator has explicitly said that implementation, not declaration, is the current task.

Builders who have experienced the previous environment will recognise the improvement. Builders who had their businesses affected by coercive conduct, threatened with site shutdowns, pressured into agreements that harmed their margins, or subjected to intimidation that went unreported, now have more channels available and more reason to believe those channels will be used.

That is a meaningful change. It is not a finished one.

More on the CFMEU: Queensland Passes CFMEU Safety Reforms.

General information only. This article does not constitute legal, financial or professional advice. Readers should seek independent advice relevant to their specific circumstances.

Author: TGB Editorial