When two award structures meet on the same shop floor
Harmonising pay and roster practices after a merger is slower than org-chart work — and more likely to drive quiet attrition if left unspoken.
Legal close does not dissolve the habits encoded in overtime rules, crib breaks, and who gets Saturday preference. On a shared shop floor, those habits become visible within a fortnight.
Name the differences early
In discovery interviews we ask supervisors to describe a normal busy week — not the policy document. The gap between policy and practice is where resentment grows when two legacy crews start comparing notes.
Avoid the false choice
Leadership often frames the problem as “pick one award and force it.” Sometimes that is required. Often a transitional period with transparent bridging payments and a published end date reduces walkouts. What fails is pretending the difference does not exist while hoping goodwill covers it.
Involve the people who live the roster
A harmonisation workshop without the leading hands is a document exercise. Bring them in after the legal constraints are clear, and give them a real decision to shape — for example the order of public holiday coverage — within boundaries finance can fund.
Quiet attrition of skilled trades is expensive. Treating roster politics as a first-class workstream is cheaper than recruiting in a tight market six months later.