ALAEA EBA VII agreement
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ame ot bank doesn't require 38 hrs to be banked before you can use the hours you have earned. There is a limit to how many hours a year the company can use ie 38 hrs in one year max, without mutual agreement. If you want to you can use the hours before you earn them and then pay them back with your next shift.
It doesnt have the stupid shift penalty clause.
If the company wants to stand you down on a sunday (if you work critical path) then its up to them to pay you your penalties.
Just think of this example ... you "volunteer" you work o/t on thurs and fri..8 hrs in total, the company stands you down on a sunday and makes you use 16 hours of the bank that you are trying to accrue. Thats fair ,isn't it?
It is much tighter in controlling the company than the alaea proposed deal.
The alaea model is one that they thought up in a hurry so they could sign a memorandum of understanding so that the BNE sight would go ahead.
The AWU hung back and discussed all the issues before the workers started in BNE and came up with some better solutions.
I don't even think that the LAMES in BNE are using the bank system yet due to admin problems.
It doesnt have the stupid shift penalty clause.
If the company wants to stand you down on a sunday (if you work critical path) then its up to them to pay you your penalties.
Just think of this example ... you "volunteer" you work o/t on thurs and fri..8 hrs in total, the company stands you down on a sunday and makes you use 16 hours of the bank that you are trying to accrue. Thats fair ,isn't it?
It is much tighter in controlling the company than the alaea proposed deal.
The alaea model is one that they thought up in a hurry so they could sign a memorandum of understanding so that the BNE sight would go ahead.
The AWU hung back and discussed all the issues before the workers started in BNE and came up with some better solutions.
I don't even think that the LAMES in BNE are using the bank system yet due to admin problems.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Numbskull, you've missed the point. It may only be voluntary but as it affects only Heavy maint then it should only be employees of heavy that have a say in whether or not it gets implemented or not. It should also be discussed ampngst heavy as to what form it should be in.
If the company came up and said we need h/m to work extended hour shifts for no extra penalties or Melbourne might go under would you as an employee outside of heavy have a right to decide this.
I might not mind the concept of o/t banking. I might even like to work it some day , but I will not work to the model that has been presented.
If the executive had come to H/M and had the extensive consultation that was promised and allowed open discussion over it's merits or the form that it has been presented then these things would have come to the surface.
Also what happened to the promise that it will be decided by heavy maintenance and if they don't want it it will not be part of the agreement.
If you believe everything that the company tells you you must be gullible.
I believe that the Bargaining committe does.
The line that it is either o/t bank for heavy or a sharply worded Transmission of business clause for everyone is stupid.
How about this reply to them?
Neither without substantial payrises.
The other big issue is that the cases that the company were using to add their T O B clause is no longer relevant.
A judge has ruled that that case can no longer be used as a precedent as it was an anomily.
The case was where a business was sold and its employees got new jobs doing the same thing with the new company i.e kept their jobs. They then realised that their eba was worded so that they could get a redundancy payment as well. It went to court and the employees won. Qantas did not want to be in that boat.
But as I said the judge has ruled that that case cannot be used as a precedent and thus Qantas's arguement falls down.
The Alaea should know that and stop using Heavy Maintenance as a bargaining tool.
It should also stop peddling lies about the impact of T O B.
Trustee 1 of the Association has stated that if a T O B comes in and Mel H/M goes under then people would lose their redundancy payments. What an outrageous load of $hit.
Numbskull you should open your eyes and ears and listen to people other that the ALAEA executive.
There's more to it than "it's Voluntary" look at the big picture.
If the company came up and said we need h/m to work extended hour shifts for no extra penalties or Melbourne might go under would you as an employee outside of heavy have a right to decide this.
I might not mind the concept of o/t banking. I might even like to work it some day , but I will not work to the model that has been presented.
If the executive had come to H/M and had the extensive consultation that was promised and allowed open discussion over it's merits or the form that it has been presented then these things would have come to the surface.
Also what happened to the promise that it will be decided by heavy maintenance and if they don't want it it will not be part of the agreement.
If you believe everything that the company tells you you must be gullible.
I believe that the Bargaining committe does.
The line that it is either o/t bank for heavy or a sharply worded Transmission of business clause for everyone is stupid.
How about this reply to them?
Neither without substantial payrises.
The other big issue is that the cases that the company were using to add their T O B clause is no longer relevant.
A judge has ruled that that case can no longer be used as a precedent as it was an anomily.
The case was where a business was sold and its employees got new jobs doing the same thing with the new company i.e kept their jobs. They then realised that their eba was worded so that they could get a redundancy payment as well. It went to court and the employees won. Qantas did not want to be in that boat.
But as I said the judge has ruled that that case cannot be used as a precedent and thus Qantas's arguement falls down.
The Alaea should know that and stop using Heavy Maintenance as a bargaining tool.
It should also stop peddling lies about the impact of T O B.
Trustee 1 of the Association has stated that if a T O B comes in and Mel H/M goes under then people would lose their redundancy payments. What an outrageous load of $hit.
Numbskull you should open your eyes and ears and listen to people other that the ALAEA executive.
There's more to it than "it's Voluntary" look at the big picture.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hey numbskull. The o/t banking is complusary for 6 month periods if you decide to "volunteer". Have a damn good read of the EBA yourself and don't listen to the @#$% dished out by the usless self serving executive. Remember once the thin edge of the wedge is in, the thick bit soon follows.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do my eyes deceive me or has this thread been given 4 stripes? It was even removed to the tool shed for several days editing.
Voluntary my a. What do you think will happen if you don't become one of the suckhole volunteers. I know who will get preference for training, o/t and promotions. Somehow I don't exactly consider Q an equal opportunity employer.
Voluntary my a. What do you think will happen if you don't become one of the suckhole volunteers. I know who will get preference for training, o/t and promotions. Somehow I don't exactly consider Q an equal opportunity employer.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It certainly is Trash Hauler, all be it a reversion back to eba4 I think? But you have to realise that if the farm is sold to old man MacDonald, he may not want to retrench anyone. So if you are not happy with the conditions of the new farmer, you put up or you walk with 4 weeks pay+annual etc..... no package.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Redstone...............I hope for all the maintenance folks that QAL realise maintenance is a product worth having. Unfortunately money is the only language they understand.
Don't they realise they are dealing with real people and their families. Keep the fight up!
Don't they realise they are dealing with real people and their families. Keep the fight up!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 407
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Come back with a different offer of much higher monetary value if you wish to include either of them.
How dare the members request through their union a bigger wage rise. Unless I'm mistaken aren't the 2000 Qf lames there to support the seven ALAEA officials negotiating the EBA? If we ask for more money then they won't get looked after and we can't have that.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You see people that the truth of the matter is that although you are all galant whilst in the group environment when you settle down on your own the sensible logic returns.
There are but a handful of radicals amoungst you who love to dance in the spotlight and beat their chests. The rest merely suffer their display. The radicals will always be radicals but the rest go away and make their own decisions away from the influence of the showmen.
Then when the EBA gets voted in the showmen scream "RIGGED" but in actual fact the showmans dance has been to no avail and they have merely made asses of themselves. The truth of the matter is that the sensible ones have ignored the showmen andt look at them and snigger. With all your ranting and raving in the end we the sensible ones have stitch you up behind your back. We support you in public but stab you in private. Hence the reason for private polls were people are not influenced by the dancing hairy chest beaters.
Life then goes on to another EBA hopefully negotiated by sensible men. In the meantime get used to this one.
There are but a handful of radicals amoungst you who love to dance in the spotlight and beat their chests. The rest merely suffer their display. The radicals will always be radicals but the rest go away and make their own decisions away from the influence of the showmen.
Then when the EBA gets voted in the showmen scream "RIGGED" but in actual fact the showmans dance has been to no avail and they have merely made asses of themselves. The truth of the matter is that the sensible ones have ignored the showmen andt look at them and snigger. With all your ranting and raving in the end we the sensible ones have stitch you up behind your back. We support you in public but stab you in private. Hence the reason for private polls were people are not influenced by the dancing hairy chest beaters.
Life then goes on to another EBA hopefully negotiated by sensible men. In the meantime get used to this one.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sydney
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cyrstal Marina, You talk as if the know all. Too many times in history have millions of people just walked silently to their graves without giving any fight, when in fact if they had only turned on their captures they would have lost some but saved many. You see they also were being brain washed into thinking they were in a hopeless position and the best thing to do was just go with the crowd and not make a fuss.
You should not take for granted that your SS Gestapo tactics are going to work this time. Many more realise that this is our last chance and on the other side of the doors lies death and emptiness. I for one will be fighting til they slam the door shut. You can count my protest vote now.
You should not take for granted that your SS Gestapo tactics are going to work this time. Many more realise that this is our last chance and on the other side of the doors lies death and emptiness. I for one will be fighting til they slam the door shut. You can count my protest vote now.