OPTUS RETAIL EA - MEMBERS TO VOTE

Members will soon be asked to vote on the proposed Optus Retail Enterprise Agreement (EA). It's important that members have access to accurate information to make an informed decision when casting their vote. Below is a summary of some of the key provisions, both maintained and improved, in the proposed EA.
Have Your Say Vote. Every eligible employee has the right to vote on the proposed agreement.
The ballot will open on 23 July, and members will be able to cast their vote before the ballot closes on 28 July.
If you have questions about the proposed agreement or would like further information, please contact your State Branch Official for assistance.
Your vote is important, and we encourage all members to participate in the ballot.

OPTUS RETAIL EBA KEY PROVISIONS

Pay and Remuneration

Employment Types and Flexibility

Working Hours and Overtime

Leave Benefits

Consultation Rights

ONE OUTAGE LOOKS LIKE AN ACCIDENT, BUT TWO

There has been a lot written and to be written about this week's Telstra Outage. Here is an extract from one contributor.

Telstra's triple-zero failure is a result of prioritising neoliberal 'competition' and reaping none of its benefits - John Quiggin - The Guardian.
Perhaps we will return to public ownership of infrastructure networks. But for now we need to consider limited steps, with a more radical solution for fragile emergency services
Another year, another telecommunications failure. In 2025, it was Optus whose network failed, leading to hundreds of triple-zero calls failing to get through. This time, it was Telstra, with similarly chaotic results. As I pointed out last time around, outcomes like this are the inevitable result of a policy framework designed to put more priority on competition than on the reliable delivery of essential services.
The failures go right back to the policy reforms of the 1990s, still viewed through rose-coloured glasses by much of the commentariat. At the start of the process, Australia had a single telephone network run by a statutory corporation (Telecom Australia) which had delivered steady reductions in cost and expansion in services over many decades. The looming challenge was the new technology of broadband fibre and cellular mobile telephony.
We could have maintained that structure and built a single high-quality network for each of these technologies. The cost savings would have been more than enough to extend coverage everywhere and provide enough resilience that no single failure could stop the system function. Competition, so much in vogue at the time, could have been provided through a common carrier model like that eventually adopted for the NBN, after a privatised Telstra failed to build broadband.
In the end, we got long-delayed and patchy networks without the benefit of competition. Telstra and Optus, the supposedly temporary duopoly established in the 1990s, still have 70% of the mobile network between them, barely changed since the turn of the century. The shift to an NBN common carrier model for broadband has produced a bit more competition but still with the duopolists having an outsized share.
Perhaps one day we will return to full public ownership of infrastructure networks, as is happening in Italy and proposed in the UK. But for the moment, we need to consider more limited steps.
The Albanese government has responded to the failure of telecommunications policies with a universal outdoor mobile obligation aimed to ensure access to basic outdoor mobile coverage (SMS and voice services) across Australia. And there have been repeated attempts to fix the problem of a triple-zero system relying on for-profit corporations. There is also the grant-based black spot program, a patchwork where a plan is needed.
All of this remains within the discredited neoliberal framework of infrastructure competition. That's fine for major cities, where there is usually a choice of three physical networks. Outside the big cities, even on major highways, the situation is far less satisfactory. We need not just a community service obligation but a national plan to expand coverage. Crucially, this must allow automatic roaming between networks, so that customers of one corporation can use an alternative where their own provider is inadequate.
A more radical solution is needed for fragile emergency services. Rather than trying to cajole the telcos into working together, we need a national essential services network (ESN) with access to all carriers and a primary focus on resilience. Essential devices would use credentials allowing automatic connection to any available mobile network. This should cover voice, SMS and some priority data. Rather than contracting with individual carriers, services such as triple zero, emergency warnings, police and hospitals would work through the ESN. Other countries such as Finland are following this route.
The world is gradually recovering from the mania for privatisation and pseudo-competitive markets that dominated the neoliberal area. But we need a more coherent response than "fix on failure". It's time to accept that essential infrastructure is too important to be left to private monopolies and duopolies, regulated or otherwise.
John Quiggin is a professor at the University of Queensland's School of Economics