I remember when the twelve hour shift was brought up at Ansett, I'd like to see if I understand if your twelve hour was the same, so I'll describe it for the benefit of non engineers, please correct me if I am wrong.
1. In the beginning there was the eight hour shift. The eight hour workday was sacrosanct. There were three shifts to get coverage.
2. Now because these are aircraft being worked on, there needs to be overlaps at the start and finish of each shift so that jobs don't get forgotten, it's about continuity.
3. With an eight hour shift, guys were making buckets of overtime - but most of that money was going straight to the treasurer as extra income tax. People were working very long hours for very little extra as they saw it.
4. So a bright LAME simply said "Lets work twelve hour shifts. Overtime does not then kick in until twelve hours elapsed. That means the company can get the overlaps necessary for safe maintenance without the company having to pay overtime - it saves the company money. Now we take home slightly less pay, but by working twelve hour shifts, we can have three day weekends and spend more time with our families. A win/win for company and staff." The only loser was the Federal Treasurer.
5. Now Abeles stomped on this idea big time at Ansett because it would have angered hawke and the union movement for whom the eight hour day and collective bargaining was sacrosanct. It sounds however that later Qantas adopted a similar sensible plan. Is this something like correct?
Now it sounds to me (and correct me if I'm wrong) that QF has underinvested in training LAMES, and has probably abused the twelve hour shift, reducing overlaps and piling on overtime.
So along comes the consultant and sez:
"hey, these AWA's are cool! Lets roll overtime and other allowances into an hourly rate. We pay these guys for eight hours. We make them hang around for five days a week, so no more long weekends, less LAMES required, and we can work them for as long as we like for no additional overtime payment. And of course over time, that "one single hourly rate" will not keep up with inflation, reducing our total costs as a percentage of sales."
Am I close? More hours of work and less pay?