FAQs and explainers


They have been breaking the rules for years, and their proposed changes will ultimately change the rules in their favor. CBA’s poor behaviour has cost us $57 million so far, and we are not going to stand by while they keep ripping us off.  By cutting RDOs from the EA, the equivalent comparable salary for each of those people on IAs would go down by around 5%, making it easier for CBA to avoid underpaying people by reducing the minimum standard, rather than just adjusting people’s salaries or putting them on fairer contracts such that they don’t fall short of the absolute minimum. We all know IAs were not genuinely agreed to at CBA, now they don’t want to give you the option. 
Right now, grade changes are a conversation that you must be a part of. If CBA get their way, there won’t be a discussion. They will have the power to change your grade without consultation. They say there are protections in the clause, but we are concerned that the grades are too subjective for what CBA have included to be protection enough. Your grade is how CBA determine the minimum salary to compare your contract with. They say they won’t misuse this clause, but this is something they can do now by consulting with workers. If it’s only needed to correct mistakes, why do they need new language?  
The FSU’s position is that an increase of 3% for everyone working so hard to keep CBA strong is more than fair in light of CEO Matt Comyn’s recent 14% increase and while WBC and NAB have paid 3.25% and 3% this year. 
CBA have not been paying superannuation on leave loading as they should have been and now they want to lock that approach into the agreement. In retirement women are disproportionally affected by lower super balances and here CBA are actively facilitating that inequality by doing the wrong thing and trying to validate it in your agreement.




If CBA had it their way, the pay offer would be 1.25%. The union has been working to ensure a better deal for workers at CBA and we don’t think this deal is fair. Thanks to the hard work and advocacy of union members at CBA their initial pay offer has been increased to where it is now. It’s not right for CBA to push you to accept this pay offer with so many strings attached. We do not believe that this deal is in employees' interests, and if a NO vote is successful the pay increases would only be further held off while CBA come back into negotiations and deal with some of the outstanding issues. The pay increases will be backdated no matter what. We need to stand together and tell CBA to go back and do a fairer deal with our union. Matt Comyn’s 15% didn’t come tied up with loss of protections against underpayments at work.
There are laws that govern the Enterprise Bargaining process. If CBA won’t address workers’ concerns in good faith after a NO vote, then the Fair Work Commission can compel them to come back to the table and meet with us. As for threatening that if they were to come back to the table they’d withdraw all their current positions; that’s up to CBA. Again though, this is hardly a sustainable bargaining position. We’ve been negotiating for nearly a year. If CBA are really saying that if their people vote NO they’ll refuse to acknowledge that and will refuse to continue negotiations properly that’s up to them... but it’s pretty poor form.
Were you ever given the choice to have RDOs as part of your contract? No? that’s because CBA spent years issuing unlawful flexibility arrangements as contracts that cut you out of this and other entitlements. This is the practice we’re trying to prevent going forward, and maintaining entitlements like this is key in maintaining fair treatment of workers at CBA. It’s a bit rich for CBA to say that not many people get them when that in itself is a product of the kind of unlawful, unfair behaviour the union is trying to stop.
If you have a Commsec contract this EA will improve your underlying conditions by bringing some elements in line with the rest of the group. That is a good thing. It’s especially important because many of the people employed by the Commsec entity don’t actually work for Commsec. CBA employed you under an entity with lower pay and conditions just because they could. Voting NO on this agreement won’t stop this proposed change, it will just ensure that it doesn’t come with strings attached. Many have missed out on pay and entitlements they should always have had as CBA employees unfairly employed on Commsec contracts - don’t let them embed unfairness into this agreement as well.


CBA Vote NO - RDOs

Everyone at the Commonwealth Bank is entitled to RDOs by way of the Enterprise Agreement. Everyone is entitled to work... Read More

CBA Vote NO - Contracts

CBA has been caught red handed using IFAs or ‘contracts’ unlawfully to distance thousands of employees from... Read More

CBA Vote NO - Unfair Pay Increases

During negotiations CBA’s initial payfer was 1.25%. They told us they were proud that. This was in the middle... Read More

CBA Vote NO - Super

CBA have not been paying superannuation on leave loading as they should have been and now they want to lock that... Read More