We have always had Transmission of business in our award and eba's.
The only difference with the companies original offer (" that we all worked very hard for seven months to get rid of and we should all be proud ") was an additional clause attached to the redundacy clause.
This is the acceptable alternative employment clause.
This means that if a redundancy condition arose,but Qantas found another job for you outside of the qantas group that had essentially similar conditions then you were obliged to take that position. No package available.
However if the suitable employment doesnt carry the same conditions that you currently work under it is not suitable.
Therefore package offered.
The reason for this clause is obviously to relieve Qantas of some finacial burden should they need to sack us.
The reality is that to find a suitable position offering the same money and entitlements for your average Qantas employed Lame is no piece of cake.Damn near impossible. Think of the conditions that you currently work under ..include staff travel,long service leave and a reasonable redundancy provision.
So really it wasn't such a huge victory on our behalf to have Qanats remove the suitable employment clause. It was a good move if the clause wasn't strenghthened to protect us better.
However it wasn't such an issue as to trade off it's removal for ot banking and different payment rates for heavy and line/base maint.
What we should have said, as many other unions have is "we are not happy to have your clause worded that way so do not include it in the EBA...Full Stop.
ps Heavy maintenance have indicated that they are not happy to incorporate an O/T bank into their work conditions so do not include that either. Full stop.
Come back with a different offer of much higher monetary value if you wish to include either of them.