The ALAEA to stick up for it's members? You must be joking. The Melbourne members initial reaction to the notice was met with comments such as "about time" but it wasn't long before we smelt a rat in the pipes and it stinks of Oldmeadow.
Reading the EBA notice it seems to all come together when the second page talks about the LAME-less tarmac issue being included into the EBA log of claims. Why would the ALAEA wish to include the LAME-less tarmac issue which can be argued primarily on the grounds of safety into an EBA log? You would lose the safety argument then and leave yourselves open for comments about wages demands for reduced safety. Well done ALAEA you really know how to f**k things up.
What concerns us Melbourne troublemakers is what could now happen if we follow the direction of the ALAEA. Prior to the issue being linked to the EBA, we could continue to do our job and if stood down would have this done on full pay. Now the employer has every right to lock as many of us out without pay as they like. It could be the bloke who disobeys management orders. It could be the entire lot of us or maybe just the ALAEA Executive chief opponents. They just happen to be the ones getting stood down for the overtime bans.
The members don't trust you Bexley and will not follow. You wouldn't support Industrial action at the last EBA when 79% voted in favour so why should you want it now?