We have said all along that the CBA Agreement is not a fair agreement. Now, we have told the Fair Work Commission that because of the way the Bank conducted the vote, it’s not fair or lawful for the CBA Agreement to be approved.
We have identified several problems that we believe are so significant that the Fair Work Commission ought to reject the agreement altogether.
There are a lot of reasons that 7746 people voted against the agreement and a lot of those reasons are unfair. All of those reasons are important, but the Commission’s focus is more technical.
The FSU is concerned that for some employees the agreement will not meet the Better off Overall Test. This will mean that those people are paid less under the EA than the minimum wage while working for Australia’s richest bank. That is not fair, and should not be allowed.
CBA ran an unprecedented sales campaign to win support for the agreement. We do not believe they met their obligations under the law to properly explain the agreement and its application – to the detriment of those who will have to work under it.
We’re also concerned that people who are not legally allowed to vote on an EBA were given a vote on this one. If the EA doesn’t apply to someone’s employment, they shouldn’t be able to vote on it.
What happens next?
The Commission will hold a full bench hearing on 8 June 2021. The hearing will determine whether the agreement can go ahead and become the EBA or not.
CBA has already paid the pay increase and begun rolling out some of the new benefits, which the union will not seek to prevent. However, CBA can’t rely upon the 2020 EA and the clauses in it until this matter is resolved.
We will keep members updated.