Going on strike for a week is a big call. It’s never a decision workers take lightly and it happens rarely.

BHP's Saraji open-cut coking coal mine in Bowen Basin, Qld. You work out here, you deserve to be looked after

But this week, over 3,500 coal mine workers from seven central Queensland mines operated by BHP have made that call.

The week-long strike comes after many months of smaller stoppages. But when you’re negotiating with one of the richest companies in the world, it takes something dramatic to get their attention.

At these coal mines, clustered around towns like Moranbah, Dysart, Blackwater and Emerald in Queensland’s Bowen Basin, up to a million tonnes of coking coal are produced each week for export, fuelling the steel-making furnaces of Asia.

These mines are highly profitable. They are a significant contributor to the record profits BHP has recorded in the past 12 months and expansion plans are firmly in place. BHP is riding the resources boom.

What’s at stake in this week’s industrial action in the Bowen Basin comes down to this: is this mining boom going to deliver better, safer, more secure jobs to Australian workers? Or are we going to let mining companies drive down workplace conditions as they ramp up production, expand their operations and rake in record profits?

BHP has fully embraced the corporate slogan du jour - “management’s right to manage” - in regard to the current industrial dispute. It really wants to come to an agreement with its Bowen Basin workforce on a new collective agreement. Truly it does. But management prerogative is “sacrosanct”, says CEO Marius Kloppers, regretfully.

In the mouths of business leaders like Kloppers, management prerogative really means “wanting everything our own way”.

There is no question of management’s right to manage. In BHP, as in all mining operations, it’s management making the decisions about investment, about production and about operations.

But we also have community expectations, backed up by industrial laws, that workers have the right to have a say. Not just over their pay, but over issues that affect them at work – like safety protections, measures to protect job security, family-friendly work arrangements, work hours and rostering.

Workers can come together, decide what’s important to them, and collectively bargain with their employer to negotiate a deal that both parties agree.

Never mind bleating from employers about “management prerogative”. When your employer is BHP, one of the biggest, richest and most powerful companies in the world, it is workers’ right to have their say on conditions like safety and job security that should be sacrosanct.

Over the past year, the big mining companies have demonstrated over and again on the national stage that they’ll do what it takes to get their own way.

BHP has played hardball in enterprise agreement negotiations with its central Queensland mining workforce for 15 months.

To their credit, the workers have stood firm. In the middle of this epic mining boom, they want their jobs to get better, not worse. They are not willing to stand back and watch BHP chip away at their conditions while profits boom.

Workers are only taking this action because the issues at stake are important.

There are a series of 15 points the parties disagree on, including:

- hanging on to important safety protections around fatigue management and the chain of command for key safety positions;
- reinstating equal pay for labour hire workers, and protections for permanent workers displaced by contractors, both slashed by BHP under WorkChoices;
- and gradually increasing superannuation to 12 percent, the same as BHP pays its management employees.

BHP made a $23 billion profit last year, yet the company won’t budge on superannuation.

These issues are all important individually – but the bigger picture is that as BHP expands its coal mining operations, it is trying to hold workers’ conditions down. BHP Head Office in Melbourne is breathing down the neck of local management, insisting they play hardball on conditions they can well afford and have readily agreed to in previous negotiations. The workforce is furious.

We know one thing about mining companies: they won’t share the benefits of this mining boom out of the goodness of their hearts.

Mining companies are tough negotiators. Just ask the Federal Government. But the Bowen Basin coal miners have backbone. They deserve support because of what’s at stake: this one-off boom should make things better for mine workers, their families and communities. Not worse.

Andrew Vickers, General Secretary, CFMEU Mining and Energy Division

Most commented

55 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Macca says:

      05:24am | 17/02/12

      The job security clauses the Union movement have been pursuing, particularly the restrictions on non full-time employees and the use of subcontractors, are ridiculously restrictive and completely limit a businesses ability to efficiently run an operation.

      Seriously, this is a a multi-million dollar mine, with workers already entitled to massive redundancies if they lose their jobs. And they are skilled miners in a miner boom, job opportunities in these towns are limitless if you’re skilled and experienced. Why is the union movement so insecure that they pursue these ridiculous job security clauses?

      It was the sticking point in the Qantas dispute, and clauses like this should have remained illegal, like they have been over the past 19 years. Gillard’s decision to let them back in was a massive win for the Union movement and people’s jobs will be put at risk because of the job security clauses.

    • Nathan says:

      05:43am | 17/02/12

      So you already have it good but think you should have it better.
      “We know one thing about mining companies: they won’t share the benefits of this mining boom out of the goodness of their hearts.”
      Your mob are not owed anything other than a pay cheque from the mining boom. Taking the safety out of this which i would think is a nice little trick to try and get the public on side i don’t think BHP are the only greedy ones.

      I have no sympathy for people who are making good money and still cry poor

    • Macca says:

      05:43am | 17/02/12

      Let’s start again.

      First of all, BHP is not driving conditions down. It is offering the same conditions with a pay rise. In anybody’s language, that is an improvement in conditions. Let’s stop lying about this.

      Secondly, your three sticking points;
      1. Everyone who has worked in a hazardous work environment knows the ultimate accountability for your safety sits with your supervisor. Why the CFMEU thinks a safety professional, a non-supervisor role, should take on this responsibility is beyond me. If you want to start with a good relationship between a supervisor and emoter, safety is a good place to start.
      2. This goes to the Job security clauses I already wrote about. Ive made my point. However, to touch of Andrew’s statement that BHP removed these clauses because of workchoices; bullshit. Clauses such as that were illegal since the 1996 workplace relations act. BHP may have rolled over some of the conditions in the agreement, but don’t point to a piece of legislation as the point of blame when it’s clearly not.
      3. Employees can elect to increase their contributions. Any increase in super would come I to consideration in your wage demands. Don’t blame the EBA because the employees won’t make a decision themselves.

    • I hate pies says:

      08:51am | 17/02/12

      Macca, on point 2 - the CFMEU want safety officers to be union members purely and simply for control. It has absolutely nothing to do with safety. These blokes have the attitude that safety is the company’s responsibility; they want everything handed to them and want to give nothing in return. The safety issue is the oldest union trick in the book. BMA’s safety systems and processes are the most rigid of all the miners; they are holding up their end of the bargain. In the end there has to be some personal responsibility.

    • Kurisu Sonsaku says:

      06:30am | 17/02/12

      Here are a few pointers;

      If you wish to share in BHP profits buy their damn shares

      These are not poor exploited workers, they earn in the high six figures

      The level of safety in the mines is absolutely anal, you need a permit for everything

      You and the rest of the bloviating windbags in the cfmeu did not consult all workers to negotiate on their behalf, so don’t come up with that crap about workers getting together.

      ” they’ll do what it takes to get their own way.” - You mean unlike you clowns.

      Tell you what, the day you stump up your own cash, not your members money, not CBus money, but your own cash and take all the associated risk then you may have something credible to say.

    • Tim says:

      07:56am | 17/02/12

      high six figures?

      So they’re earning $900K +? Yeah right.

    • Kurisu Sonsaku says:

      08:03am | 17/02/12

      @ Tim - did i say 900K? no i don’t believe i did, so stop being a tool.

      Here, just for you i’ll clarify $150K - $250K.

      That is the evil rich people the cfmeu hate too.

    • Tim says:

      08:20am | 17/02/12

      “They earn in the high six figures”

      Maybe your definition of high is different from the rest of us.

    • Kurisu Sonsaku says:

      08:39am | 17/02/12

      Who is the rest of us, and when did you become a spokeshead for the ‘us’

    • TimB says:

      08:50am | 17/02/12

      To be fair Kurisu, you said *high* six- figures.

      6 figure range is $100,000-$999,999. Exactly where the ‘high’ end of that range starts is open to interpretation, but Tim figuring on 900K is not unreasonable. $150-250 K is decidedly on the ‘lower’ end of that scale.

      Nitpicking aside, I agree with your underlying point. The miners aren’t exactly struggling. I sense another example of a union throwing its weight around under the Gillard IR regime.

    • Borderer says:

      08:55am | 17/02/12

      Basically if they want to earn more money, they can work at a different mine, if they don’t like the schedule, quit and find a job in the city, nothing is stopping them, it’s not like they live there, being a FIFO worker is different to other jobs.
      What they actually want is a more money for doing less or the same. Sure the mine is profitable, but that doesn’t mean that BHP are greedy and evil. The workers are well paid, well cared for, as safe as can be in such an industry, the ‘poor treatment and conditions” would persist even if you provided a butler service. In BHP’s shoes I would have shut the workers out for a week as well, told them all to quit if they don’t like it or transfer to another operation. BHP won’t give in on this because the union is targeting a profitable mine to hurt BHP, the goal is to drive up wages accross the board. They already get structured pay rises above CPI levels, maybe they should talk to Qantas maintenance staff and ask them what militant unionism gets them?

    • I hate pies says:

      08:58am | 17/02/12

      Their wages are already too high in relation to their skill level and responsibility, yet they want more. And regarding super; management are all on individual contracts; maybe they can go on individual contracts and negotiate 12%. Yeah right, that’ll never happen because they know that they are already overpaid. To suggest they deserve the same conditions as management highlights their ingorance and arrogance.
      These negotiations highlight the sole purpose of the modern union - money. Their modus operandi is to drive a wedge between the employer and employee and use threats and intimidation to get more than they deserve.

    • TimB says:

      07:01am | 17/02/12

      Does anyone have access to the full 15 point list of demands? I see that Andrew here has only seen fit to include three.

      A quick Google search turned up the fact that the workers are being offerred an annual payrise of 5% for the next three years, which is pretty damn good especially in the curruent economic climate. Also on the table are bonus payments.

      So what are the other sticking points Andrew? Because I have yet to see anything indicative of ‘corporate greed’ yet.

    • Tim says:

      08:00am | 17/02/12

      5% increase would be chicken feed in the mining industry.

      I get more than that in the non-mining engineering sector. When supply is tight, wages go up.

      I too would like to know what the other sticking points are because I think the three demands listed above are completely reasonable. If that’s all they’re asking for then I can’t believe that BHP wouldn’t give it to them.

      Unless there’s more to it.

    • TimB says:

      08:19am | 17/02/12

      Well it’s more than CPI/Inflation Tim. A lot of places generally get a 2-3% raise a year, so IMO it’s looking fairly good. Especially when you toss in bonuses on top. But that’s just my opinion.

      But I’m gussing it’s not pay that’s a sticking point or else it would have been listed here. What better way to illustrate corporate greed than cry foul over a measly pay rise?

      And yep fully agree there’s more to this story than we’re being told.

    • I hate pies says:

      09:06am | 17/02/12

      5% isn’t “measly” when you have the number of employees that BMA have, and in comparison to the inflated wages BMA already pay. These workers are already overpaid. Corporate greed has nothing to do with paying someone fairly for the work they do - this just typical union propanganda designed to convince people their members are down-trodden, and to convince the members they are somehow entitled to more than they’re worth. How about a comparison of miners wages between Australia and the rest of the world; then we’ll see how underpaid they really are.

    • AdamC says:

      09:06am | 17/02/12

      TimB, I don’t believe that there is anything more to this story. It seems quite simple: Vickers and his members want more money and better perks and privileges. You cannot really blame them for that, it is the free market after all. I never quite understand why unions and their members have to dress up their own venal self-interest. It is both dishonest and unconvincing, and is one of the reasons unions get pretty average public relations outcomes.

      I don’t have a problem with unions, so long as they are not running the country (thanks, Julia), demanding pay rises in industries on government life support (see the car industry), or, through a combination of their own recruitment success, poorly-considered industrial laws and a refusal to accept commercial reality, rendering important businesses unsustainable (see Qantas).

      These BHP coal guys are already on a pretty good wicket. Why should I give a stuff about BHP’s refusal to immediately meet their lavish demands?

    • year of the dragon says:

      09:24am | 17/02/12

      Tim says:09:00am | 17/02/12

      “5% increase would be chicken feed in the mining industry.”

      Correct. So they are already getting a payrise 60% greater than the rest of us could reasonably expect. More evidence that they are handsomely remunerated.

      “I get more than that in the non-mining engineering sector.”

      Well good on you. You are one of the lucky ones to get a pay rise greater than inflation whilst not progressing in seniority and with adequate performance in their role.

    • TimB says:

      09:34am | 17/02/12

      I think you misunderstand Adam. I mean there’s stuff Andrew here isn’t revealing. Demands that to any reasonable people would appear quite ludicrous, and would explain why BHP isn’t budging. That’s why we only have 3 of the 15 main union demands.

      I agree, I suspect that the unions are overreaching here.

    • Tim says:

      10:31am | 17/02/12

      Year of the Dragon,
      Read Adam C’s response.
      There is nothing wrong with the union trying to negotiate higher pay for their workers.
      That’s what enterprise bargaining is all about and the fact that other people in Australia don’t get that much means absolutely nothing.

      If the profits are there and the worker’s skills are in demand then good on them.

      Just like there’s nothing wrong with BHP or banks making mega profits, there’s nothing wrong with workers participating in the free market and getting paid hansomely.

      You could always go and work for them.

    • SimonFromLakemba says:

      10:32am | 17/02/12

      I’m usually always pro Union but this one I can’t support.

      1. 15% payrise over 3 years is great, idiots not to take it. If they were smart they would put the extra into BHP shares!

      2. 12% Super, I tend to agree there, it should be all equal across board. Standard is 9%?

      3. Nothing wrong with safety, but to employ another person to be on a site just to have someone there that is Unionised isn’t correct. Sites already have a worker who is designated OH&S that would check safety cards etc.

      I cant see the rest of the demands but I know it has to do with housing, would be interesting there as doesn’t the companies pay miners rent?

      I just think the golden goose needs to be untouched, especially hard to whinge when the basic village idiot is getting paid $100k to drive a truck.

    • year of the dragon says:

      10:43am | 17/02/12

      Tim says:11:31am | 17/02/12

      “There is nothing wrong with the union trying to negotiate higher pay for their workers.”

      I agree. Never said there was. Are you suggesting that a strike is a negotiation?

      “That’s what enterprise bargaining is all about and the fact that other people in Australia don’t get that much means absolutely nothing.”

      Don’t get that much? What the hell have the unions been doing for the last 100 years? What the hell has the ALP (the worker’s party) been doing for the last two terms in government? 

      “If the profits are there and the worker’s skills are in demand then good on them.”

      I agree and they are being paid handsomely for those skills and for the demand for those skills. I’m all for leaving it to the market. It’s the unions who are not.

      “Just like there’s nothing wrong with BHP or banks making mega profits, there’s nothing wrong with workers participating in the free market and getting paid hansomely.”

      I agree. And they are being paid handsomely. I’m not the one whingeing.

      “You could always go and work for them. “

      Absolutely. But I’m perfectly happy doing what I do. They are the ones whingeing. They could always come and do what I do though. They’d have to be satisfied with much less money though.

    • Tim says:

      11:31am | 17/02/12

      Year of the Dragon,
      Seems we pretty much agree then although I will make a few points:

      Striking is a valid form of negotiation. Not one that I think is too effective but it does have its tiny place.

      “Don’t get that much”  I meant in relation to the mining industry. ie other industries earn less.

      This article is pretty much a whinge about nothing but its no worse than the ones from mining companies saying that they couldn’t afford to pay the mining tax or that they’re doing it tough.

      Seems that the unions and the companies both like to cry poor.

    • year of the dragon says:

      12:26pm | 17/02/12

      Tim says:12:31pm | 17/02/12

      “Striking is a valid form of negotiation”

      Striking is not negotiation. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t valid under certain circumstances but it’s not negotiation. It’s a consequence of failure of negotiations.

      “its no worse than the ones from mining companies saying that they couldn’t afford to pay the mining tax”

      Ah you see, they never said that they couldn’t afford to pay it.

      What they said is that it would reduce the return to shareholders which would mean that the return for the risk taken would make Australian mining companies are less attractive investment than other alternative investments which would mean that less capital would be invested in mining enterprises which would mean less mining in Australia which would mean fewer mining projects which would have a whole host of flow on effects including fewer jobs. 

      “that they’re doing it tough.”

      I haven’t heard them claim that they are “doing it tough”.

      Just as highlighting legitimate safety issues is perfectly reasonable, so is highlighting legitimate commercial challenges such as a high AUD and an incompetent Federal Government government.

    • rod sexton says:

      07:37am | 17/02/12

      Andrew Vickers is just another whinging fatcat CFMEU official trying to justify his position

    • Kurisu Sonsaku says:

      08:09am | 17/02/12

      Andrew Vickers as the general secretary perhaps you could explain to the punchers why the cfmeu has engineered a demarction dispute in Melbourne, back to the 70’s for IR.

    • Chris says:

      08:16am | 17/02/12

      family-friendly work arrangements, work hours and rostering.

      You have got to be kidding me!!!

      They work the best part of 4 - 6 months a year and make between $120,000 - $150,000 a year.

      I am a mining engineer based in Bowen Basin and these fellas have nothing to bitch about. The amount of safety discussions that occur (before every meeting someone has to do a safety share) is ridiculous. They are the ones out on the Haul Roads who cut corners in fully loaded trucks that can weigh upwards of 600t.

      Once again its the stupid bloody unions going out there preaching to the masses saying we are so hard done by.

      $120,000 - $150,000 a year for roughly 4 - 6 months actual work time
      Food and Accommodation
      Training (CPR etc)
      21 days holidays + 10 sick days
      And job security for at least the forseable future considering the way the mining boom is going.

      Maybe if these dip shits didnt go out and buy $70,000 commodores, jet skis, boat,s or anything stupid like that they would have a bit more money and wouldnt have to strike to cry poor to BHP.

      BHP like any organisation is about making money, the more they make the better so why on earth would they want to give me money to employees if they are already on a bloody good wicket!! (work roster, salary etc included)

    • I hate pies says:

      09:11am | 17/02/12

      Well put Chris - they won’t get any sympathy from the locals up here. We all see how the “poor” miners spend their little amount of money on their small amount of time off. Makes you wonder why you went uni sometimes hey? Take away the HECS bill and I wouldn’t lose much at all if I became a truck driver; plus I’d have far more time off and when I finished my shift I’d actually be able to finish work.

    • Andrew says:

      12:00pm | 17/02/12

      A mining engineer is someone who does 4 years at uni then spends the next 5 years being trained by these dip shits you talk of, then upper management realises he is no good so he moves to another mine for more money and the cycle begins again.

    • Wynston Cruso says:

      01:14pm | 17/02/12

      Absolutely agree Chris. Aside from the actual professionals working in the mines, I think for the most part the workers are overpaid, underqualified dudes who would be otherwise unemployable outside of that particular industry. I personally know one guy who currently can’t pay a 3 month rent debt due to the fact that he spends all his money on stupid shit like 40 grand car stereos. When the boom subsides, which it will, unemployment will skyrocket.

    • TimR says:

      08:17am | 17/02/12

      BHP is giving you a 5% pay rise per year, but you still want more. Get back to work.

    • Freeman says:

      08:23am | 17/02/12

      “striking a blow against BHP greed”

      By trying to get more fingers in the pie?

    • Chewy says:

      08:55am | 17/02/12

      haha well said..

    • Greed&Envy; says:

      08:26am | 17/02/12

      Yes, yes. Plenty of greed here. Sadly I don’t see it on behalf of BHP. If you want to share in a company’s profitd, buy their shares you idiot. I can’t wait til mining companies dumo Australia in defiance of these greed and envy based restrictions. Australia isn’t the only country with resources, and whining about how your cut isn’t big enough, and trying to take THEIR bat and ball and go home hurts ALL of Australia.

      Put up all 15 points, or STFU.

    • year of the dragon says:

      09:16am | 17/02/12

      “Going on strike for a week is a big call. It’s never a decision workers take lightly and it happens rarely.”

      It seems to be happening increasingly often lately

      “The week-long strike comes after many months of smaller stoppages.”

      Months of small stoppages? Perhaps the CFMEU needs some lessons in negotiations. Even with new industrial laws they can’t get traction without resorting to stopping work.

      “BHP is riding the resources boom.”

      And mine workers right along with them.

      “Workers can come together, decide what’s important to them, and collectively bargain with their employer to negotiate a deal that both parties agree.”

      Absolutely. And then the union comes in setting unreasonable expectations with workers in a desperate attempt to seem relevant.

      The CMFEU is infamous for bullying, intimidatory tactics. Ironically, this was confirmed to me by one of their former employees who, on resigning to join BHP, was subject to bullying, bastardy and intimidation of the worst kind.

      “it is workers’ right to have their say on conditions like safety and job security that should be sacrosanct.”

      I’m not sure that anyone, let alone BHP, disagree with you on this.

      “Over the past year, the big mining companies have demonstrated over and again on the national stage that they’ll do what it takes to get their own way.”

      Over the past year, the unions have demonstrated over and again on the national stage that they’ll do what it takes to get their own way.

      “- and gradually increasing superannuation to 12 percent, the same as BHP pays its management employees.”

      Management negotiate a package that includes super. The more that goes into super, the less they get in pay. If the workers wish to direct 12% of their pay to super they have that right as does everyone. More in super, less in take home – make your choice ladies.

      “We know one thing about mining companies: they won’t share the benefits of this mining boom out of the goodness of their hearts.”

      But they will share it with anyone who is prepared to risk their own capital and invest in BHP shares. But the unions don’t work like that – they want all the reward without any of the risk. The want a share of the good times without the pain in the bad times.

      “this one-off boom should make things better for mine workers, their families and communities. Not worse.”

      Cry me a river. They are on massive incomes many times the national average. And good luck to them. However, whilst safety should be an absolute priority (the internationally low rate of mine accidents or deaths is testament to that fact that safety conditions are excellent in Australian – tip of the hat to unions of the past), if they don’t want to give up some family time, living conditions and other comforts, then work in the city and earn less.

      Bloody sooks.

    • Chewy says:

      09:18am | 17/02/12

      Andrew you must be kiding, no? Go ask any small business owners who work their ring out when was the last time they had a pay rise? Actually ask many Australians who havent had the snouts in the trough when was the last time they had a pay rise?
      This country has become la la land, I wonder what the rest of the world thinks..

    • Matt says:

      09:41am | 17/02/12

      There seems to be a trend here of Unions wanting to control parts of the way companies run their businesses. This underlying issue is no different to the Qantas dispute.

      As others have far more eloquently said, if you want a bigger piece of the pie, invest in BHP shares and take some of the risk. If you want a lower risk profile, be happy with receiving a lower return.

      And let’s be honest - the “lower return” you’re currently receiving is still a very healthy one compared to equivalently skilled people not in the mining industry.

    • alex says:

      09:51am | 17/02/12

      Unions will force the big companies to South America and Africa with thier Greed…. ha ha ha the irony of it, only Australia’s legendary Unions and Labor Govt could find a way to ruin a good thing

    • Greed&Envy; says:

      09:54am | 17/02/12

      I see Andrew blase this argument purely on the basis they are profitable. Excellent. Businesses of Australia are now authorised to start slashing jobs and pay scales due to tough times. Swords are double edged.

    • Anna C says:

      10:08am | 17/02/12

      Every day we are hearing about companies laying off workers (mostly in the Eastern states) meanwhile the mining business is booming and miners are starting to sound a little too greedy to me.

      Nope you guys get no sympathy from me. I think you are already well paid.  Enjoy it while it lasts cause it will be over sooner than you think

    • thatmosis says:

      10:40am | 17/02/12

      Easy solution, sack the bloody lot and fly in overseas workers, note I said workers, something that seems to be lacking in Union people.
      This is another example of Union greed and will rsult in the companies looking overseas to fill positions and not take on any union member. Unions are destroying this country by white anting from the inside profitable businesses because of greed.
      Companies might make billions of dollars profit but the share holders are the ones that benefit as well as the workers. Add to much od a payroll burden and jobs will go and it will be the Unions fault entirely.

    • Sly grog says:

      03:12pm | 01/03/12

      Flying in overseas workers is not a good solution. Think about the economic consequences of such a statement. Unions are pushing the envelope knowing full well federal election time will bring them back to earth. However more money for Australian workers is good for Australian economy, hence a mining tax. Its easy to say mine workers for BHP are not good workers, however when you spend time looking at the results and efforts of BHP employees and their management the results and profits speak for themselves. Lets hope CFMEU truly represent their constituents and draw a close on strike action.

    • WA Redneck says:

      10:42am | 17/02/12

      Ahh the ol’ safety chestnut.  Love the way unoins trot that out every time they don’t get their way.  Operating procedures are now so safety conscious as to be flat out comical.  Maintenance ‘spanner time’ down to 30% in many mines here, the rest is ‘safety’. 

      And ‘workchoices’ the other favourite.  Its been gone for 5 yrs now mate get another line its really quite embarassing banging on about a 5 yr dead policy.

      Yes Greed&Envy; is right.  As soon as a company make a profit the unions have their hands out.  Skilled tradesmen etc have a good argument for high wages but there are a lot of unskilled muppets earning big dollars for doing not very much.  And they still want more.

      If you really care about your workers try to get them to save a bit of their income, invest in their training, prepare them for life after the boom.  Coz a lot of them will finish their 10 yrs in the mine and have nothing to show for it but 15 Bintang singlets bought in Bali and an overpriced v8 they still have a loan for.

    • Pfft says:

      10:45am | 17/02/12

      Greed can be a good thing if it gets a union flunky a 5mil pub in perth,pretty handy on a union salary

    • Kurisu Sonsaku says:

      11:09am | 17/02/12

      is that ‘Heavy Kevvie’ or ‘beer gut joe’?

      I keep forgetting which one drives the $70K Range Rover & which one owns the apartment block

    • jf says:

      11:44am | 17/02/12

      Kurisu Sonsaku says:12:09pm | 17/02/12

      “I keep forgetting which one drives the $70K Range Rover & which one owns the apartment block”

      Range Rovers don’t come in much less than $150,000.

      However, I’m sure your number is right and ‘an arrangement’ was made.

    • Chris says:

      12:29pm | 17/02/12

      Whenever I see the word “greed” little alarm bells start going off in my head.  The phrase “corporate greed” is even better.

      Others have made the point but I’m going to as well - the “working class” miner is an extremely well paid individual when compared to his/her skillset.  The demand for workers in the mining industry at present is massive and well documented.  They are compensated for being in the middle of nowhere.

      What these negotiations come down to, and what they always come down to, is money.  BHP wants to spend less - the CFMEU couldn’t really care how much BHP spends.  The safety elements and other red herrings thrown in there simply seek to divert attention from the primary points of dispute that could wrap this whole thing up.

      I will be fascinated to find a union, anywhere, ever, that accepts that its workers are actually paid enough for what they do.  If the miners who are earning top dollar for their day’s work can’t get enough, then the rest of us are stuffed.

      Where does anyone think these workers who cry poor will be over the next week?  During the height of the GFC, each day reading quotes about how everyone was struggling, I would walk past pubs filled to the gills every day, with blue-collar workers “drowning their sorrows” with laughter and beer.  I, for one, largely gave up drinking in the same period because it was a waste of money. 

      I’ll bet that the pubs in Dysart will have a merry trade over the next few days…

      There is no sympathy here.  Some workers are underpaid for what they do, but I doubt many of them are the topic of this article. 

      BHP is riding the boom?  So are you, mate.

    • Brent says:

      01:00pm | 17/02/12

      I used to work for BMA and I regard the CFMEU with utmost contempt.

      At every opportunity they used “safety” to get on site and agitate workers. Anyone who works for Rio or BHP knows that their safety systems are world class, and the cause of angst amongst workers as they are so onerous and strict.

      They actively encourage employees to use “the unions” solicitors to sue the company, with little regard to the employees future. (Most end in seperation of employment as part of settlement). And of course the brown paper bags for the referrals to the solicitors.

      These days, many mining jobs are actually sedentary in nature (drivers, dragline operators). Sure, some are heavier, dirtier and dustier (maintenance etc) but many are qualified hose operators and spend their time hosing down concrete and pushing buttons in a control room. They are massively overcompensated for their skill set.

      I haven’t had a pay rise in the last 4 years because I work for a small business and the economy is generally in the toilet. Even when I get an increase I would only expect a CPI increase, unless my duties had changed significantly.

      Boo frickin hoo CFMEU

    • PG says:

      05:30pm | 17/02/12

      I’ve been on enough sites where dangerous work takes place to know that there is a complete lack of personal responsibility for safety by far too many people. The fact that you need safety supervisors is evidence of that. If the employees were serious about being responsible for their own safety and the safety of their fellow workmates they would not need safety supervisors! I’ve also witnessed such ridiculous work practices because of the above that unnecessarily raises the price of things like electricity in the name of safety that any time I hear a union going on strike because of some safety issue I call bullshit.

      You want guaranteed job security? What planet are you on? Mining workers in a mining boom worried about job security FFS? There is never any guarantee of job security, but surely being in the mining industry in a mining boom, earning double what you would elsewhere is pretty good work?

    • Paul Mason says:

      05:57pm | 17/02/12

      If after earning a big fat salary and you find it to hot in the kitchen,then get out and let someone who wants to work take your place.

    • Ricksta says:

      06:37pm | 17/02/12

      Read DIRTY MONEY by Matthew Benns then tell me what responsible corporate citizens BHP are.
      How many BHP Execs got killed at work last year?
      ,Now ask how many workers /contractors on BHP sites never made it home to their family’s after a shift

    • Lurch says:

      11:08pm | 17/02/12

      This is how it used to work in the coal mines of WA and i bet some of these issues will rise again.
      This list is serious, I shit you not.
      In addition to your base hourly rate you also got allowances such as:
      Artificial light (if using a headlamp underground)
      Water ( if required to work in water)
      Wet allowance ( If you got wet)
      Dust Allowance ( dusty conditions)
      Quota allowance ( if your team got your quoted tionnes out on time & shift)
      Mechanical allowance ( varied if depending on which machine you operated regardless of how long you drove it)
      Manual tools (allowance for using manual tools, shovel etc)
      The list goes on & on
      These guys used to work 3 x 8 hour shifts per day too, maybe some of the clowns who are arguing for the agreement in this article should revert back to that and lose the 12 hour shifts altogether.
      I wonder if they will be happy once they have “shoved it up” the company?

    • Tim says:

      07:48am | 18/02/12

      Union OH&S Rep = best way to shut the mine forever until some bogus OH&S claim (along with all the other non-OH&S demands like wages of course) are met. That’s the oldest trick in the book.

      I worked on a site where the OH&S Rep = Union Rep. All he does (thankfully illegal now):

      1. Ask for a union ticket during induction. If you don’t have one, “this is a union site”.
      2. Walks around all day harassing non-union workers if they slip through the net. “This is a union crib room” “This is a union toilet”
      3. Pass all the induction details (contact no, address) to people who can threaten non-union workers to join.

      Thugs

    • Cate says:

      03:07pm | 18/02/12

      Why is there a determination ferom the bleeding whinging Gillard Government and followers that we must cut the legs of companies that put Australia on the Global map.  You are all ingrates.  Whilst our big greedy??? ( I don’t think so) companies remain in Australia and their profits remain in Australia I will feel a lot more comfortable that we aren’t going to turn into a Socialist Communist regime.  Lazy is as lazy does and diligent is as diligence does.  These companies owe Australian zero. Furthermore why am I paying for these illegal imports coming on boats. Arrive in Australia and one week later they are on the medicare gravy train.  I don’t want to pay a levy and there should never have been a levy and I have private health insurance and would appreciate that the insurance companies cover everything including the trip to the Dr.  I would love to opt out of medicare and just use my private health as the medicare scheduled fees are unrealistic in terms of real cost.  So there stick that where it belongs Red. Why are we paying for interpreters to attend the Dr? No wonder we are all broke. We don’t want anymore people of Middle Eastern appearance. Send them all back along with anyone who can’t speak English. Enough is enough and I’ve had enough.

    • Cate says:

      03:07pm | 18/02/12

      Why is there a determination ferom the bleeding whinging Gillard Government and followers that we must cut the legs of companies that put Australia on the Global map.  You are all ingrates.  Whilst our big greedy??? ( I don’t think so) companies remain in Australia and their profits remain in Australia I will feel a lot more comfortable that we aren’t going to turn into a Socialist Communist regime.  Lazy is as lazy does and diligent is as diligence does.  These companies owe Australian zero. Furthermore why am I paying for these illegal imports coming on boats. Arrive in Australia and one week later they are on the medicare gravy train.  I don’t want to pay a levy and there should never have been a levy and I have private health insurance and would appreciate that the insurance companies cover everything including the trip to the Dr.  I would love to opt out of medicare and just use my private health as the medicare scheduled fees are unrealistic in terms of real cost.  So there stick that where it belongs Red. Why are we paying for interpreters to attend the Dr? No wonder we are all broke. We don’t want anymore people of Middle Eastern appearance. Send them all back along with anyone who can’t speak English. Enough is enough and I’ve had enough.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter