Office of the Merit Protection Commissioner

Corporate Statement and Priorities for 2016–17

Aspiration

To be a centre of expertise providing impartial, professional and quality services that support the integrity and performance of the APS.

Purpose

We:

·  review Australian Public Service (APS) employment-related decisions

·  provide a range of fee-related services to the APS and other jurisdictions.

Our purpose is to improve employment decision making and practices in the APS and, to encourage productive and harmonious working environments.

We aim to deal with concerns quickly, impartially and fairly and to balance the interests of employees and agencies.

Review by the Office of the Merit Protection Commissioner (OMPC) provides the APS with the opportunity to improve employment decisions and employment practices. The OMPC is more cost effective and practical than alternative mechanisms such as employment tribunals and the courts. These alternatives include the risk that courts and tribunals will impose requirements on APS employment decision-making that limit APS employment framework flexibility.

Goals

Our focus this year is to:

·  improve agency people-management performance by sharing OMPC information and observations

·  contribute to public service wide understanding and awareness of integrity and risks within review and employment frameworks

·  progress legislative amendments to enhance the flexibility and efficiency of OMPC and agency functions

·  assist clients to interact with us more effectively by building upon and maintaining our Clear Communications and website initiatives

·  promote internal gains in productivity, quality and timeliness of reviews and apply technological solutions where appropriate.

Environment

The Merit Protection Commissioner (Commissioner) is an independent statutory office holder located for administrative purposes with the Australian Public Service Commission.

The Commissioner’s statutory functions are to:

·  Independently review the quality and fairness of employment decisions relating to an individual (s 33 of the Act)

This includes a wide range of issues, such as Code of Conduct decisions (excluding termination of employment); performance management decisions; reductions in classification for un-satisfactory performance; allegations of bullying and harassment; decisions about access to leave or training and payment of allowances. Our impartial consideration of concerns is important in re-engaging employees with their workplaces.

·  Undertake impartial inquiries into alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct (s 50A of the Act)

The decision by the Commissioner as to whether current, or former, employees have breached the Code of Conduct is not reviewable under section 33 of the Act. This service provides an independent assessment for sensitive or long running issues. Before the OMPC undertakes a case, the agency head must request the service and the employee, either current or former, must consent. It is provided on a fee for service basis.

·  Independently review promotion decisions for APS 1–6 staff (s 50(e) of the Act; Division 5.2 of the Regulations)

Promotion reviews provide an assurance mechanism for the integrity of agency employment decision-making and discouraging patronage, cronyism and other forms of undue influence. Employees can seek a review of a promotion decision on the basis of relative merit.

·  Provide merit-based selection services (s 50(e) of the Act; Part 4 of the Regulations)

An Independent Selection Advisory Committee (ISAC) provides impartial administration by an expert Office for merit based selection exercises. The OMPC partners with an agency to conduct selection exercises for nation-wide, bulk recruitment through to limited pools for specialised roles. An ISAC is provided on a fee for service basis and the outcome is not subject to promotion review.

·  Provide other related employment services (s 50 of the Act; Part 7 of the Regulations)

The OMPC provides a range of other services to the APS and other jurisdictions.

Operational Risks:

·  reputational risk from failing to deliver high quality statutory functions within acceptable timeframes

·  retaining and recruiting staff with the desired capabilities

·  maintaining quality outputs in a demand-led environment.

How the OMPC supports a ‘fair system of review’ for the APS

• We consistently apply the principles of merit and procedural fairness to employment related decisions.

• We promote the impartiality and ‘fairness’ of decisions.

• We work with the APSC and others to ensure the legislative framework reflects contemporary needs while maintaining basic principles of merit.

·  We balance the rights and responsibilities of the individual, the agency and the APS.

·  We enhance the quality, consistency and credibility of outcomes for all parties.

How the OMPC supports ‘productive working environments’ for the APS

·  We improve people management practices and decision-making by sharing lessons from reviews to inform agency policies and guidance.

·  We address integrity, performance and business risks by identifying issues in enterprise agreements and people management frameworks.

·  We assist employees to understand the employment framework, reasons for decisions and manage realistic expectations on what can be achieved.

·  We reduce direct and indirect costs of conflict in the workplace by providing a timely and non-legal resolution to employment-related matters.

·  We improve employee engagement by our impartial and expert consideration of issues and tailored, easy to read decisions.

We know we have made a difference in achieving our goals when:

·  OMPC input on how to improve performance is actively sought by agencies

·  OMPC observations and input on integrity and risks within review and employment frameworks is specifically requested from across jurisdictions

·  OMPC legislative framework reflects the requirements of a merit-based modern public service

·  feedback on OMPC communication through multiple forums is positive

·  the OMPC consistently meet Visit the website at reasonable standards of timeliness and quality for demand-led reviews.

More information on the OMPC

Visit the website at: http://meritprotectioncommission.gov.au/

Goals, outcome statement and strategies for 2016–17

Goals and statement of outcomes / Strategies to achieve our goals / 2016 audit of achievements
1.  Improve agency people management performance by sharing OMPC information and observations.
We have made a difference when:
·  Our input on how to improve agency performance is actively sought. / ·  Present at conferences, practice groups and forums
·  Share agency specific lessons learnt with agencies
·  Continue to work with agencies to implement lessons learnt from their review data, including positive acceptance of review outcomes. / ·  Presentations to the Australian Government Leadership Network (AGLN), Recruitment Practice Group and Small Agency Forums
·  Regular agency-specific discussions.
2.  Contribute to public service-wide understanding and awareness of integrity and risks within review and employment frameworks.
We have made a difference when:
·  Our observations and input are specifically requested from across jurisdictions. / ·  Continue to engage with the Integrity Agencies Group
·  Share lessons learnt from reviews within the APSC, APS agencies and other jurisdictions
·  Contribute to forums on integrity and risk, including through secondment opportunities and international delegations. / ·  Integrity Agencies Group Meeting
·  Observer at APSC Executive Group
·  Regular discussions with Review and Integrity based organisations, including the OECD and Ombudsman’s Office
·  Hosted Indonesian secondment.
3.  Progress legislative amendments to enhance the flexibility and efficiency of OMPC and agency functions.
We have made a difference when:
·  Our legislative framework reflects the requirements of a merit based modern public service. / ·  Continue to identify and reduce ‘red-tape’
·  Continue to implement recommendations from the Belcher and other reviews, as appropriate
·  Research best practice across jurisdictions
·  Progress options on potential legislative amendments in areas of responsibility. / ·  Participation in OECD Integrity Forums
·  Communication with other jurisdictions on best practice models for providing review and assurance services
·  Contributed to discussion on changes to the Commissioner’s Directions.
4.  Assist clients to interact with us more effectively by building upon and maintaining our Clear Communications and website initiatives.
We have made a difference when:
·  Feedback on our communication through multiple forums is positive
·  Our clients understand our role and how we can assist. / ·  Update the OMPC website regularly
·  Share thought-leadership and practical lessons learnt from review through a variety of media including newsletters, information sheets and updates
·  Embed issues-based writing in decisions
·  Enhance agency liaison
·  Survey agencies and individuals
·  Publish case studies about our work. / ·  Website rewritten, redeveloped and relaunched
·  Newsletter, information sheets on Promotion Reviews, Independent Selection Committees and Code of Conduct distributed
·  Updated Client survey
·  Case studies published regularly.
5.  Promote internal gains in productivity, quality and timeliness of reviews and apply technological solutions where appropriate.
We have made a difference when:
·  We consistently meet reasonable standards of timeliness and quality for demand-led reviews. / ·  Complete the Management Information System upgrade
·  Continue to update internal guidance on decision making, templates and letters
·  Complete end of lease accommodation requirements
·  Pilot ‘desk top anywhere’ as a flexible work option
·  Continue to support mental health awareness for staff. / ·  Refreshed panels for MPC and agency nominees on committees
·  Clear Communication reinforced
·  Implemented flexibility initiatives such as job sharing and working from home
·  Completed mental health awareness and developing resilience surveys.