Key Issues in the Mangoola Agreement Vote
Mangoola workers are being asked to vote on a proposed Enterprise Agreement that will affect pay, job security and conditions for years to come. This page explains the union’s concerns and why workers should vote NO.
Voting NO does not end bargaining. It keeps workers in a stronger position to secure a fair agreement.
Real Wages Have Already Fallen
Since the 2021 agreement, Mangoola wage increases have been 2% per year. Over the same period, inflation has been significantly higher, meaning workers’ real wages — what pay can actually buy — have gone backwards.
Put simply, while pay under the EA rose slightly, the cost of living rose much faster. Groceries, fuel, housing and everyday expenses have all increased well beyond 2%. As a result, workers are effectively worse off now than they were at the start of the last agreement.
The proposed agreement offers increases of 4%, 4%, 4% and 3% over four years. While this may sound substantial, it does not restore the purchasing power lost during the previous agreement and is unlikely to keep pace with future inflation.
A Tiered Pay System Locks In Lower Wages
The proposal introduces a three-tier pay structure where workers performing the same job could receive different rates of pay.
Lower tiers would sit around 80–90 percent of the full rate, with the gap between the lowest and highest tier to reach about $41,000 within three years. New starters would be placed on the lowest tier, and workers transferring between sites could be pushed down regardless of experience.
Over time, this creates a permanently cheaper workforce and breaks the long-standing principle that workers doing the same job should receive the same pay.
Permanent Jobs Could Come Under Pressure
Lower-paid tiers make it easier to replace experienced permanent workers with cheaper labour over time. While “grandfathering” protections may apply at Mangoola, they may not follow workers if they move sites.
Fewer permanent roles mean less job security, fewer career pathways, and greater uncertainty for families who rely on stable employment in the region.
Weaker Redundancy Protection
Under the agreement, redundancy payments are calculated at base rate and based on rostered hours, rather than actual earnings. Rosters could potentially be reduced before redundancies occur, resulting in significantly smaller payouts.
This shifts puts risk onto employees, while the union’s proposed improvements to strengthen redundancy provisions were not accepted.
Allowances Are Not Guaranteed
The current $6,000 per year location allowance is not written into the proposed agreement. Without being locked into the EA, this payment could be removed at any time.
A proposed increase to the tool allowance was also rejected.
Bonus Payments Become More Uncertain
The TR1-ACE bonus system would remain in place and be expanded so that contractors would be included.
Contractors are not covered by the Mangoola Enterprise Agreement. Workers have raised concerns about contractors influencing bonus outcomes even though they are not party to the agreement itself.
Structural Changes Last Longer Than Pay Rises
Structural changes such as tiered pay systems can remain in place for many years once introduced.
Workers are concerned that accepting these changes now would permanently reshape conditions at the site and set a lower benchmark for future negotiations.
The Decision Matters for the Long Term
For many Mangoola workers and their families, this vote is about more than short-term pay increases. It is about long-term job security, fairness on site, and the future structure of the workforce.
Workers are encouraged to carefully consider how the proposal would affect not only current employees but also future generations entering the industry.
Vote NO
A NO vote keeps options open and maintains bargaining power. A YES vote locks the proposed terms in for the life of the agreement.
If you work at Mangoola, make sure you have the full picture before casting your vote. If you have any questions, contact the MEU.
No. It means the proposed deal is rejected and discussions continue. Workers can still negotiate for pay increases as part of a revised agreement.
The vote opens on March 31 and closes on April 1.
A NO vote does not shut down the site, cancel jobs, or end the process. It simply means the proposal was not accepted.
Voting NO signals that workers want changes to the offer, such as stronger protections, fairer pay arrangements, or different terms.
Ultimately, a NO vote keeps options open. A YES vote locks the proposed terms in for the life of the agreement.
Yes and workers fought to remove them. Tiered and seniority-based systems were abolished in the past because they were seen as unfair, divisive and a way to push wages down over time.
Many workers are concerned that reintroducing them could undo decades of progress.
Redundancy provisions determine what workers receive if jobs are cut. If payments are calculated at base rate or reduced hours rather than actual earnings, payouts may be significantly lower. Workers see this as a critical safety net during uncertain times.