There’s no doubt that Puto 2 construction workers deserve fair pay, safe conditions, and strong representation. But what happens when an organisation apprising to lead that fight starts selling dreams that sound good in a Facebook post but fall apart under the weight of reality?
The Offshore Alliance – a collaboration between the AWU and the MUA – has carved out a reputation as a loud and aggressive player in the industrial landscape. Its slogans are bold, its claims even bolder. But behind the chest-beating rhetoric lies a troubling trend: unrealistic wage promises that risk leaving workers disappointed, and potentially worse off in the long run.
The Alliance has repeatedly floated wage claims and percentage increases for the Pluto 2 project that far exceed industry standards, economic indicators, or even the outcomes of the most hard-fought union campaigns across the country including any of the Alliance’s own offshore construction agreements (covered here). While it’s perfectly reasonable to start bargaining ambitiously, there’s a fine line between aspiration and delusion.
When a union starts pitching pay increases of 80%, or even more – with no clear industrial strategy or economic justification – it starts to feel less like bargaining and more like a membership drive. Workers are told they can “win big” if they “hold the line,” but what’s rarely admitted is that such claims are rarely realised – and often come with long periods of stalled negotiations, broken-down relationships with workers, and well below expectation wage increases.
A letter that has been doing the rounds on the Pluto 2 site has three options that the Alliance is putting to the few members they have on the job and more importantly the hundreds of potential members. In this letter they claim “9.6% (Wheatstone) + 22.3% (CPI) up front)” and “all allowances to match Wheatstone 2017 amounts”. Nowhere does the Alliance mention rosters – with 14/7 swings and12-hours shifts an overwhelming desire on site.
The Alliances claim sounds nice but what does it look like in reality. Let’s break it down.
| Pluto 2 Current Rates 3:1 10-hour Shifts | |||
| Classification | All-purpose Rate | Weekly | Annual |
| CW1 | $44.80 | $4,399.20 | $163,847.76 |
| CW2 | $46.54 | $4,555.80 | $169,680.31 |
| CW3 | $48.48 | $4,730.40 | $176,183.27 |
| CW4 | $49.94 | $4,861.80 | $181,077.24 |
| CW5 | $51.39 | $4,992.30 | $185,937.70 |
| CW6 | $52.84 | $5,122.80 | $190,798.16 |
| ELV/CT | $48.47 | $4,729.50 | $176,149.74 |
| Fitter, Welder, Carpenter etc | $50.41 | $4,904.10 | $182,652.70 |
| Electrician | $55.33 | $5,346.90 | $199,144.74 |
| Inlec | $57.75 | $5,564.70 | $207,256.68 |
| NDT Technical Officer | $53.33 | $5,166.90 | $192,440.66 |
| Electronics Tradesperson | $57.68 | $5,558.40 | $207,022.04 |
| MC (Hiab) | $44.80 | $4,399.20 | $163,847.76 |
| MC (0-15t) | $49.94 | $4,861.80 | $181,077.24 |
| MC (15-100t) | $51.39 | $4,992.30 | $185,937.70 |
| MC (100-180t) | $52.84 | $5,122.80 | $190,798.16 |
| MC (180-260t) | $54.30 | $5,254.20 | $195,692.14 |
| Tower Crane | $54.30 | $5,254.20 | $195,692.14 |
| MC (260t plus) | $55.75 | $5,384.70 | $200,552.60 |
The Alliance’s proposal on a 3-weeks on 1-week off roster with 10-hour shifts is doable but would take some serious effort.
| OA Proposed Rates 3:1 10-hour Days 9.6% (Wheatstone) + 22.3% (CPI) = 31.9% to all-purpose rate | ||||
| Classification | All-purpose Rate | Weekly | Annual | Weekly % Increase |
| CW1 | $61.85 | $6,196.60 | $230,791.73 | 40.86% |
| CW2 | $64.26 | $6,413.44 | $238,867.84 | 40.78% |
| CW3 | $66.92 | $6,653.39 | $247,804.85 | 40.65% |
| CW4 | $68.94 | $6,835.01 | $254,569.10 | 40.59% |
| CW5 | $70.95 | $7,015.52 | $261,292.35 | 40.53% |
| CW6 | $72.95 | $7,196.04 | $268,015.61 | 40.47% |
| ELV/CT | $66.54 | $6,618.64 | $246,510.49 | 39.94% |
| Fitter, Welder, Carpenter etc | $69.20 | $6,858.59 | $255,447.50 | 39.85% |
| Electrician | $75.52 | $7,426.78 | $276,609.77 | 38.90% |
| Inlec | $78.85 | $7,727.27 | $287,801.53 | 38.86% |
| NDT Technical Officer | $73.62 | $7,256.57 | $270,270.36 | 40.44% |
| Electronics Tradesperson | $79.26 | $7,763.37 | $289,145.77 | 39.67% |
| MC (Hiab) | $61.85 | $6,196.60 | $230,791.73 | 40.86% |
| MC (0-15t) | $68.94 | $6,835.01 | $254,569.10 | 40.59% |
| MC (15-100t) | $70.95 | $7,015.52 | $261,292.35 | 40.53% |
| MC (100-180t) | $72.95 | $7,196.04 | $268,015.61 | 40.47% |
| MC (180-260t) | $74.96 | $7,376.55 | $274,738.86 | 40.39% |
| Tower Crane | $74.96 | $7,376.55 | $274,738.86 | 40.39% |
| MC (260t plus) | $76.96 | $7,557.07 | $281,462.12 | 40.34% |
The Alliance’s proposal on a 2-weeks on 1-week off roster with 12-hour shifts is pure fantasy.
| OA Proposed Rates 2:1 12-hour Days 9.6% (Wheatstone) + 22.3% (CPI) = 31.9% to all-purpose rate | ||||
| Classification | All-purpose Rate | Weekly | Annual | Weekly % Increase |
| CW1 | $61.85 | $8,324.03 | $268,690.54 | 89.22% |
| CW2 | $64.26 | $8,617.96 | $278,178.47 | 89.16% |
| CW3 | $66.92 | $8,943.23 | $288,677.81 | 89.06% |
| CW4 | $68.94 | $9,189.42 | $296,624.55 | 89.01% |
| CW5 | $70.95 | $9,434.12 | $304,523.13 | 88.97% |
| CW6 | $72.95 | $9,678.82 | $312,421.71 | 88.94% |
| ELV/CT | $66.54 | $8,896.12 | $287,157.18 | 88.10% |
| Fitter, Welder, Carpenter etc | $69.20 | $9,221.39 | $297,656.51 | 88.03% |
| Electrician | $75.52 | $9,991.61 | $322,518.26 | 86.87% |
| Inlec | $78.85 | $10,398.94 | $335,666.50 | 86.87% |
| NDT Technical Officer | $73.62 | $9,760.88 | $315,070.62 | 88.91% |
| Electronics Tradesperson | $79.26 | $10,447.87 | $337,245.73 | 87.97% |
| MC (Hiab) | $61.85 | $8,324.03 | $268,690.54 | 89.22% |
| MC (0-15t) | $68.94 | $9,189.42 | $296,624.55 | 89.01% |
| MC (15-100t) | $70.95 | $9,434.12 | $304,523.13 | 88.97% |
| MC (100-180t) | $72.95 | $9,678.82 | $312,421.71 | 88.94% |
| MC (180-260t) | $74.96 | $9,923.52 | $320,320.29 | 88.87% |
| Tower Crane | $74.96 | $9,923.52 | $320,320.29 | 88.87% |
| MC (260t plus) | $76.96 | $10,168.21 | $328,218.87 | 88.84% |
Let’s cut through the spin. The Alliance has been dangling the promise of hefty wage increases—but only if you’re on a 3:1 roster. That’s already a big ask and would take significant industrial muscle to achieve. But here’s the kicker: workers desire a 2:1 roster with 12-hour shifts coupled with the Alliances increase amount to pure fantasy. It’s never going to happen—not under the current industrial landscape.
So which is it? Is the Alliance actually fighting for a 3:1 roster with 10-hour shifts or a 2:1 roster with 12-hour shifts? The fact they refuse to clearly answer that question should set off alarm bells. If the Alliance is really a “member-led democratic collaboration,” why won’t they come clean with workers about their actual position?
As you can see from the flyer, which was put forward to and endorsed by over 800 union members, a 15% base rate uplift combined with a move to 14:7 rosters and 12-hour shifts would deliver more than the Alliance’s 3:1, 10-hour shift proposal — and less than their unrealistic 14:7, 12-hour shift option.
Workers have a clear choice: fight for something achievable or…
The reality is, workers still don’t know what the Alliance stands for, because they don’t have a position. They don’t have many members on the job, and the truth is, they don’t know what the workforce wants — because the workforce isn’t talking to the Alliance. They’re not buying what the Alliance is selling.
Let’s not forget the track record of one of the Alliance’s key players—the AWU. For years, they’ve sided with employers, routinely signing off on substandard agreements: 3:1 rosters and 10-hour shifts, despite overwhelming worker support for 2:1 rosters and 12-hour days.
The most recent betrayal? The BHP Western Ridge Crusher Project Agreement 2024. All four unions—the AWU, AMWU, CFMEU, and ETU—agreed not to sign anything unless there was a united front. The 3:1 roster was a key sticking point. Yet just two days after that commitment, the AWU broke ranks, sold out their counterparts, and worse—sold out the workers—by locking in the 3:1 roster and 10-hour shifts. Why? Because they got Chifley’s IP written into the EA. Because they do CCIWA’s bidding.
So if you’re a worker who wants a 2:1 roster and 12-hour days, you need to ask yourself: can you trust the Alliance? Given the AWU’s track record of cutting deals behind closed doors, it’s not a stretch to say that workers backing the Alliance are setting themselves up to be sold out—again.
The problem with fanciful 80% claims isn’t just that they’re unlikely to be achieved – it’s that they undermine trust. When workers are told to reject reasonable offers in pursuit of a fantasy, they lose not just time and money, but momentum. Employers dig in. Negotiations stall. The workforce becomes divided between those who still believe and those who see the writing on the wall.
And when reality eventually hits – when the “win” turns out to be far below what was promised – the result is disillusionment. Members feel sold out, confused, and angry. The snake oil wears off, and what’s left is a bitter taste and an erosion of faith in collective action.
Let’s, for a moment, entertain the fantasy that the overwhelming majority of the Pluto workforce downed tools and hit the picket line in pursuit of an 80% weekly wage increase. Woodside could simply play its trump card—de-scope Bechtel and bring in Monadelphous (the Alliance’s company of choice), which already has the Monadelphous Engineering Associates Pty Ltd Pluto Train 2 Project Agreement in place. That agreement doesn’t expire until 20 March 2027 and offers rates of pay no better than the current Bechtel deal.
Unions win by organising smart, not just shouting loud. They win by setting achievable goals, building majority support, and crafting smart industrial strategies backed by facts, not Facebook posts. The Offshore Alliance’s current approach risks turning legitimate worker grievances into a political spectacle. It attracts clicks, yes – but it also attracts scrutiny, blowback, and often, legal consequences that don’t serve members’ best interests.
Instead of working collaboratively to secure steady, bankable gains, the Alliance appears to be lurching toward maximalist demands with minimal planning. And in doing so, it risks handing employers an easy narrative: that the union movement is out of touch, irresponsible, and unwilling to deal in reality.
Workers on Pluto 2 deserve real wins – not shiny illusions. That means unions being upfront about what’s possible, honest about what’s at stake, and strategic about how to get there. The best unionists are those who can look their members in the eye and say: “Here’s what we’re fighting for, and here’s how we’re going to get it – together.”
If the Offshore Alliance wants to be more than a headline generator, it needs to stop chasing unicorns and start delivering results grounded in economic reality and industrial power. Otherwise, it risks becoming exactly what employers would love to see: a loud voice with little leverage and a dwindling base of disillusioned workers.
