So i was reading this thread with interest and wasn't going to post until the vitriol spouted by mr fixit. it's 2007 mate. catch up.
Obviously there are a number of different perspectives, and a few of the posters are actually involved on the ground in perth. what i don't understand is this reluctance to change. yeah sure mr fixit, you could have an extended dispute, however lets face it, such a dispute is only going to damage exactly what it is you purport to be protecting: the safety of the travelling public. The 'scabs' you all talk about appear to be trying to protect exactly that. even those referred to by shafted again.
I've never understood personal vilification as a means to secure industrial objectives.
From these posts it seems to be quite a clear issue: the company is trying to change to become more efficient and save this $40mil odd. For some reason this seems offensive to many, even though it is a completely legitimate business objective.
Does it really matter what colour collar someone wears if that's the goal? Surely meeting this target is something that benefits all involved.