Yeah saw that Bendo. Could the the $94K caveat be interpreted as being able to overide the fact that one is...employed by a constitutional corporation; or employed in Victoria or a territory; or a Commonwealth employee; or employed in interstate or overseas trade or commerce as a waterside worker, maritime employee or flight crew officer.(???)
My line of thought was, for example, if one is an Air Traffic Controller, Pilot, Mariner etc on $93999pa you're OK, but earn over that and the safety net may be gone (Bueller?). Bit like the AND/OR parts of AIP etc.
There seems to be a lot of low-vis grey and camouflaged exit doors for the employer maybe members of the learned legal profession need no interpret and comment. Buggered if I know.
Makes you wonder how something like this heavily tilted towards the employer can come out and yet Federal Labor is taking a pasting in the opinion polls.