...backdating the termination could entitle workers to the difference between the wages they would have been paid under the award, and the wages they were paid
I thought the point of a BOOT was so the employee was not to be disadvantaged by going with an EBA.
No, no the BOOTS on the other foot.
Because they don’t underpay themselves and if anything are overpaid through a series of salary, perks and share options (obtain for 4 cents and flog off for open market value $37.73) they’re not worried about “getting a home loan” nor paying the rent and all those other sort of employee struggles.....
What this reveals is a systemic trouble with EBAs and reading award rates across multiple awards. Do I use the federal or state one and which of the hundreds do I apply to this occupation ?
Apparently said Julia was warned of the repercussions of EBAs v collective awards where weak workplaces used to piggyback on wage rises of strong workplaces with that nexus now cut we see no wage growth and capped Public service wage growth of “no more than 2% pa, gosh for four years most agencies voted down their proposed EBAs and so got no wage rise at all - unlike the easy ride of those on the shares - price rises plus fully franked dividends all over the place.
When it’s happening in the bastion of blue chips, then you know there’s a serious lack of interest in “getting it right

. I don’t consider making it a criminal offence - it’s not life and death - but there’s something seriously amiss if this is the case.
Perhaps EBAs need to mandate 4 cent share options so all employees can share in the profiteering instead of 4 “can’t share with them options - they’re not professional snobs like us”