Finally in April of this year, Svitzer dropped their long running EBA termination case after they had spent 2 long years of relentlessly pursuing it in the courts despite the continuous attempts by all 3 Unions and Recommendations directly from the Fair Work Com- missioner to drop off. This came after the WA Branch of the MUA took a small delegation at the end of March earlier this year to join the national delegation to protest the Maersk AGM in Copenhagen in support of our members at Svitzer. It came through incredible international pres- sure after the initial push through the ITF Maersk Steering group during the visit to Copenhagen and all of the campaigning around the Maersk AGM and the Danish print and social media. This was then brought home through the direct intervention of the International Dockworkers Council (IDC) who have stood staunchly by the WA Branch through every ma- jor campaign we have run over the last 2 years. Over the last couple of years, Svitzer had refused to pull back from prosecuting the termination of the EA and while the legal defence allowed the MUA to campaign broadly, the international intervention and campaign- ing through both the ITF and IDC overturned this de- structive campaign by local Svitzer management who seemed unable to pull away from the demolition of their own business and its reputation. Negotiations continued after this period under the supervision of Fair Work and unfortunately, a final position was reached that simply wasn’t acceptable to the MUA and its membership. While we fought at a national level and across the Ports to oppose the current agreement getting up, it is also true that any of the hardline strategies Svitzer employed over the last few years would have resulted in a far inferior outcome had they been successful. And, although our members stood together to oppose the current agreement, the officers and engineers split and voted it up and time will be the judge of how much damage this will do us. Already we have seen Svitzer attack the IR classification in key ports, knock us out of the interview process and we wait to see what they do with the POP’s and contracting out our work after the 12 months is up. MUA members at Svitzer now wish our Comrades at DP World the best of luck because the CEO who oversaw the destruction of Svitzer’s reputation with the clients, government, and workforce, quit shortly after the agreement got up to start at the scene of the next big waterfront dispute. If the form guide is a reliable indicator, it won’t be too long before he f**ks that joint as well but it’s clear DPW brought him on for a reason.
VOTE NO! ATTENTION SVITZER WORKERS: THE COMPANY’S EBA PROPOSAL MUST BE REJECTED
7 JUNE 2023
United We Stand and Meet Fire with Fire !
Comrades, The process for negotiating this Enterprise Agreement has without doubt tested the fortitude of not only the negotiating team but also the membership over the last 4 years. Unfortunately, despite the best efforts of your negotiating committee and the solidarity between the three unions, the outcome reached at the Fair Work Commission during the s240 process leaves too much room for Svitzer managers to make unilateral changes at their will during the life of the agreement. On this basis, we cannot recommend you vote in favour of it. The rushed process of negotiation before the FWC during the last bargaining sessions on 10 and 11 May did not allow for proper consultation with delegates, members and officials. That prevented the opportunity for final drafting sessions as had been requested by the three maritime unions, and meant some drafting was conducted by email rather than a line-by-line read in person with all parties. Despite all this work, the outsourcing clause in the proposal being put forward by management which is still unacceptable. On that basis all officials and delegates – some 30 representatives who deal with Svitzer – met on Tuesday 6 June to resolve a position to put to members. The meeting lasted over 2 hours and heard from the MUA’s lawyers about alternative outcomes if the vote is NO. The lawyers’ advice is printed overleaf.
• Clause 14A, new clause that deals with outsourcing: This was a claim from the unions to prevent a future Geelong outsourcing example. Unfortunately the final words created some unintended consequences that if left unaltered would allow the company to outsource at any time after following consultation provisions. • Clause 10, Continuity of Operations and Dispute Resolution Procedure (10.1 specifically): Although unchanged from 2016 agreement, this would when read in conjunction with clause 14A Outsourcing and Clause 40.3 POPs allow the company to make changes through Clause 10. • Clause 13, Reduction, Cessation or Growth: Again, while unchanged, when read in conjunction with clauses 14A and 40.3 have implications where Svitzer have an easier run to changing rosters, salaries etc. • Clause 40.3, Variation to Port Operating Procedures: This clause allows Svitzer to change POPs and removes the right of the unions to propose any changes and also provides a specific role for Fair Work Commission on determining the risk on Svitzer exiting a port. AREAS OF CONCERN:
On this basis, the MUA recommends you VOTE NO!
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator