1

APPLICATION FOR INTERNAL REVIEW OF AN EMPLOYMENT DECISION

(Section 61 Public Sector Act 2009)

Note: This Application must be made within 21 days of the date of notification of the employment decision.

To: Chief Executive Officer

Department for Child Protection

APPLICANT DETAILS

(Full name) Classification

Position held

Work location

Telephone: (wk) (M)

I declare my eligibility to exercise the right of a grievance review pursuant to Parts 6 and 7 of the Public Sector Act 2009 (the Act) in regard to the decision of xx/xx/2017 the Chief Executive of the Department for Child Protection (the Department) to require me to attend an appointment on xx/xx/2017 at for psychological testing (attached).

I received notification of the employment decision on xx/xx2017

The said employment decision is:

  • An administrative employment decision (pursuant to section 3 of the Act);
  • Directly affecting my employment (pursuant to section 61(1) of the Act); and
  • Made by the Chief Executive (see FAQ), which means my section 61 review must be conducted by a person who is not an employee of the Department (pursuant to Regulation 26(7) of the Public Sector Regulations 2010 (the Regulations)).

Further, and consistent with the Commissioner for the Public Sector Guideline – Review of Employment Decisions (page 6), my reasonable expectation is that the person appointed to undertake this review will not be an external contractor or consultant of the Department, but a suitably senior, experienced and independent public sector employee who has had no prior dealings with this matter.

(My statement on child safety and myself – add notes or delete)

Relevant particulars of my grievance are as follows:

  • The Department states that “There is a body of research confirming that psychological assessments significantly contribute to the understanding and identification of suitable profiles for work in child protection settings”. No such a “body of evidence” of information has been provided to me.
  • The Department previously provided the PSA in May 2015 with an agreement that I would not be subject to psychological assessments. It is unreasonable that the employment decision now requires that I am subjected to this process.
  • My suitability to work with children is evidenced by my work performance to date. It is unreasonable to suggest that an external contractor will provide the Department with a greater insight on my suitability than any existing mechanisms within the department. There has been no indication that my work performance will be taken into account in an assessment of my suitability by an external contractor.
  • The CE has stated that staff can be terminated as a result of the psychological assessment process. This is causing concerns and I do not see how this is consistent with the Public Sector Act that such a process or disciplinary action is even appropriate. This is harsh and unreasonable.
  • The Public Sector Act provides a range of mechanisms for appropriate processes when there are concerns about performance. These mechanisms are in place to determine employees’ suitability for roles. The blanket approach which impacts specifically on me is unreasonable, as options to manage employees under the Act are available. The decision to undertake this process assumes there are unsuitable employees in roles. It is similar to requiring every staff member to undertake a medical assessment. I request more information about the statutory authority of this employment decision. It has not been explained to me.
  • I have been made aware that the psychological testing process has involved extremely personal questions regarding personal relationships; status and history of relationships; the state of relationships with current partners; sexual experiences, practices and fantasies (including whilst engaged in the sexual act); masturbation practices; fidelity and reasons for infidelity; why I could be childless or whether myself or my partner have engaged in IVF; use of dating websites; multiplicity of sexual partners; history of ‘one night stands’, and use of the internet to access pornography. I find the prospect of these intrusions to my privacy highly personal, invasive, embarrassing, stressful, and above all irrelevant. I am also concerned that questions may seek private information about those close to me. As an employee I believe I am entitled to my privacy. The employment decision for me to submit to such questions is harsh and unreasonable.
  • The CE has stated that not participating in the psychological testing process may result in disciplinary action. This is unreasonable. I have a right to maintaining my privacy. Further to the process being unreasonable, the threats associated with not participating in such a gross invasion of privacy are harsh and unreasonable.
  • If the psychological testing process were to proceed there would be sensitive and embarrassing information made available to the Department and other agencies. Such personal information, including reports, and the conclusion of the assessment will be accessible in the public sector and there is potential for this to be accessed outside. To seek such personal information without any enforceable guarantee of confidentiality of my private information or circumstances is unreasonable.
  • The Department has informed me that the information will also be shared with DCSI who conduct the working with children clearance. I have been seeking information about the implications of this, and how information is to be utilised. It is not reasonable to require me to undertake a process without a clear understanding of how information arising from the assessment will be shared.
  • It is also not reasonable to expect me to participate in a process without any information about what purpose any information arising from the assessment could be used. For example, information could be used for selection processes, or workplace relationships not related to caring for children. There may also be impacts to my personal life and employment, whatever the assessment.
  • The Department also states that I have no right to having a support person with me during the assessment. It is unreasonable that I have not been provided the option of having a support person present in this process.
  • The Department says that I am required to sign a form that the Department states is not a consent form but rather an “acknowledgement”. This suggests that I am required to agree to share information arising from this process when I do not agree. This is harsh and unreasonable.
  • The employment decision to undergo the psychological assessment is not reasonable for all the reasons above. The gross invasion of privacy alone is a serious concern, but furthermore the limited information, limited development of policy and issues create uncertainty of how the process may impact on me, in my professional and private capacity.

Taking account of all of the above my grievance is that the employment decision is unreasonable, unjust and unfair in the manner of its making and has been harsh in its effect on me.

I request formal acknowledgement of the receipt of this application within seven days date of application i.e. by xx/xx/2017.

I require formal notification that the review has commenced within 21 days of date of application (pursuant to Regulation 26(4) i.e. by xx/xx2017, with the name, title and public sector agency of the reviewer, together with contact details.

The above statements and attached material comprise the information and submissions in full that I wish to provide in full (pursuant to Regulation 26(5)). Whilst I am available to respond to further questions from a reviewer, in the company of a support person, my expectation is for the review to be completed within 21 days of commencement (pursuant to Regulation 26(5)) i.e. by xx/xx/2017, and for me to be advised at that date of the outcome.

Yours sincerely,

Signature of Applicant Date / /