Procedures for Determining Breaches of the Code

Procedures for determining breaches of the Code of

Conduct and for determining sanction

I,FinnPratt,theSecretaryoftheDepartmentof Families,Housing,CommunityServicesand IndigenousAffairs('theDepartment'), establishtheseprocedures undersubsection15(3)ofthe PublicServiceAct1999('theAct').

Theseprocedurescommenceon1July2013.

These procedures supersede the previous procedures made for the Department under subsection15(3)oftheAct,butthepreviousprocedures maycontinuetoapplyfortransitional purposes.

FinnPratt

Datedthis dayof 2013.

1. Applicationof procedures

1.1. Theseprocedures applyindetermining whetherapersonwhoisanAPSemployee in the Department, or who is a former APS employee who was employed in the Departmentatthetimeof thesuspectedmisconduct,hasbreachedtheAPSCodeof Conduct('theCode')insection13ofthePublicServiceAct1999('theAct').

1.2. These procedures apply in determining any sanction to be imposed on an APS

employeeintheDepartmentwhohasbeenfoundtohavebreachedtheCode.

1.3. Theseprocedures, astheyapplytodeterminingwhethertherehasbeenabreachofthe Code,applytoanysuspectedbreachoftheCodeexceptforoneinrespectofwhicha decision had been made before 1 July2013 tobegin aninvestigation to determine whethertherehadbeenabreachoftheCode.

1.4. Theseprocedures, astheyapplytodetermining anysanctionforbreachoftheCode, applywhereasanctiondecisionisunderconsiderationonorafter1July2013.

1.5. In these procedures, areference to abreach of the Code by a person includes a referencetoa personengaginginconductsetoutinsubsection15(2A)oftheActin connectionwiththeirengagementasanAPSemployee.

Note: NotallsuspectedbreachesoftheCodeneedtobedealtwithbywayofdeterminationunder theseprocedures.Inparlicularcircumstances,anotherwayofdealingwithasuspected breachoftheCodemaybemoreappropriate,includingperformancemanagement.

2. Availabilityofprocedures

2.1. Asprovidedforinsubsection15(7)oftheAct,theseprocedures arepubliclyavailable ontheDepartment'swebsite.

3. Breach decisionmakerandsanctiondelegate

3.1. AssoonaspracticableafterasuspectedbreachoftheCodehasbeenidentifiedandthe SecretaryoftheDepartment('theSecretary')oroneof thefollowingDepartmental employees:

theChiefOperatingOfficer;or

theGroupManager,CorporateSupport;or theBranchManager,PeopleBranch;or

theSectionManager,WorkplaceRelationsandManagerAdvisorySection,

hasdecidedtodealwiththesuspectedbreachundertheseprocedures, theSecretary orthatemployeewillappointadecisionmaker('thebreachdecisionmaker')tomakea determinationundertheseprocedures.

Note: TheAustralianPublicServiceCommissioner's Directions2013providethatwherethe conductofanAPSemployeeraisesconcernsthatrelatebothtoeffectiveperformanceand possiblebreachesoftheCode,theAgencyHeadmust,before makingadecisionto commenceformalmisconductaction,haveregardtoanyrelevantstandardsandguidance issuedbytheAustralianPublicServiceCommissioner.

3.2. NothingpreventstheSecretaryortheaboveemployees fromappointingthemselvesas thebreachdecisionmaker.

3.3. Theroleofthebreachdecisionmakeristodetermineinwritingwhetherabreachofthe

Codehasoccurred.

3.4. Thebreach decision maker may seekthe assistance ofaninvestigator withmatters includinginvestigatingtheallegedbreach,gatheringevidenceandmakinga reportof recommended factualfindingstothebreachdecisionmaker.

3.5. The person who is to decide what, if any, sanction is to be imposed on an APS employeewhoisfoundtohavebreachedtheCodemustholdadelegationofthepower undertheActtoimposesanctions('thesanctiondelegate').

3.6.Theseproceduresdo notpreventthebreachdecisionmakerfrombeingthesanction delegateinthesamematter.

Note: AnydelegationofpowersundertheActthatisproposedtobemadetoapersonwhoisnot anAPSemployeemustbeapprovedinwritinginadvancebytheAustralianPublic Service Commissioner.Thisisrequiredbysubsection 78(8)oftheAct.Thiswouldinclude delegationofthepowerundersubsection15(1)toimposeasanction.

Note: Appointmentasabreachdecisionmakerundertheseproceduresdoesnotempowerthe breachdecisionmakertomakeadecisionregardingsanction.OnlytheSecretaryora personwhohasbeendelegatedthepowerundersection15oftheAct andrelatedpowers, suchasundersection29oftheAct,maymakeasanctiondecision.

4. Personor personsmakingbreachdeterminationand imposinganysanction tobeindependentand unbiased

4.1. Thebreachdecisionmakerandthesanctiondelegatemustbe,andmustappeartobe, independentandunbiased.

4.2. The breach decision maker and the sanction delegate must advise the Section Manager,WorkplaceRelationsandManagerAdvisorySection,PeopleBranchinwriting iftheyconsiderthattheymaynotbeindependent andunbiasedoriftheyconsiderthat theymayreasonably beperceived nottobeindependent andunbiased,forexampleif theyareawitnessinthematter.

5. Thedeterminationprocess

5.1. Theprocessfordeterminingwhetherapersonwhois,orwas,anAPSemployeeinthe DepartmenthasbreachedtheCodemustbecarriedoutwithaslittleformality,andwith asmuchexpedition,asa properconsiderationofthematterallows.

5.2. Theprocessmustbeconsistentwiththeprinciplesof proceduralfairness.

Note: Proceduralfairnessgenerallyrequiresthat:

•thepersonsuspectedofbreachingtheCodeisinformedofthecaseagainstthem(i.e.any materialthatis beforethedecisionmakerthatis adversetothepersonortheirinterestsand thatiscredible,relevantandsignificant)

•thepersonisprovidedwithareasonableopportunitytorespondandputtheircase,in accordancewiththeseprocedures,beforeanydecisionismadeonbreachor sanction

•thedecisionmakeractswithoutbiasoranappearanceofbias

•thereislogicallyprobativeevidencetosupportthemaking,onthebalanceofprobabilities, of adversefindings.

5.3. AdeterminationmaynotbemadeinrelationtoasuspectedbreachoftheCodebya personunlessreasonablestepshavebeentakento:

a)informthepersonof:

i. the details of the suspected breach of the Code (including any subsequent variationofthosedetails);and

ii. wheretheperson isanAPSemployee, thesanctionsthatmaybeimposed on themundersubsection15(1)oftheAct;

and

b) givethepersonareasonableopportunitytomakeawrittenstatement,orprovide furtherevidenceinrelationtothesuspectedbreach,within7calendardaysorany longerperiodthatisallowed.

Note: Thisclauseisdesignedtoensurethatbythetimethebreachdecisionmakercomesto makeadetermination, reasonablestepshavebeentakenforthepersonsuspectedof breachtobeinformedofthecaseagainstthem.Itwillgenerallyalsobegoodpracticeto givethepersonnoticeatanearlystageintheprocessofasummaryofthedetailsofthe suspectedbreachthatareavailableat that timeandnoticeof theelementsoftheCodethat aresuspectedtohavebeenbreached.

Note: Thebreachdecisionmakermaydecidetogivethepersontheopportunitytomakeboth a writtenandanoralstatement.

5.4. Apersonwhodoesnotmakeastatementinrelationtothesuspectedbreachisnot,for thatreasonalone,tobetakentohaveadmittedtocommittingthesuspectedbreach.

5.5. Forthepurposeofdeterminingwhetherapersonwhois,orwas,anAPSemployeein theDepartmenthasbreachedtheCode,aformalhearingisnotrequired.

5.6. Thebreachdecisionmaker(orthepersonassistingthebreachdecisionmaker,ifany) wheretheyconsiderinallthecircumstancesthattherequestisreasonable,mustagree toarequestmadebythepersonwhoissuspectedofbreaching theCodetohavea supportpersonpresentinameetingorinterviewtheyconduct.

6. Sanctions

6.1. The process for deciding on sanction must be consistent with the principles of proceduralfairness.

6.2. IfadeterminationismadethatanAPSemployee intheDepartmenthasbreachedthe Code,asanctionmaynotbeimposedontheemployeeunlessreasonable stepshave beentakento:

a)informtheemployeeof:

i. thedeterminationthathasbeenmade;

ii. thesanctionorsanctionsthatareunderconsideration;and

iii. the factors that are under consideration in determining any sanction to be imposed;and

b) givetheemployeeareasonableopportunitytomakeawrittenstatementinrelation tothesanctionorsanctionsunder consideration within7calendar days, orany longerperiodthatisallowedbythesanctiondelegate.

Note: Thesanctiondelegatemaydecidetogivetheemployeetheopportunitytomakebotha

writtenandanoralstatement.

Note: AsanctioncannotbeimposedonapersonwhoisaformerAPSemployee.

7. Record ofdeterminationandsanction

7.1. IfadeterminationinrelationtoasuspectedbreachoftheCodebyapersonwhois,or was,anAPSemployeeintheDepartmentismade,awrittenrecordmustbemadeof:

a) thesuspectedbreach;and b) thedetermination;and

c) wherethepersonisanAPSemployee--anysanctionsimposedasa resultofa determinationthattheemployeehasbreachedtheCode;and

d) ifastatement ofreasons wasgiventotheperson regarding thedetermination in relationtosuspectedbreachoftheCode,or,inthecaseofanemployee, regarding thesanctiondecision--thatstatementofreasonsorthosestatementsofreasons.

Note: TheArchivesAct1983andthePrivacyAct1988applytodepartmentalrecords.

8. Procedurewhenanongoingemployeeistomovetoanotheragency

8.1. Thisclauseappliesif:

a) aperson whoisanongoing APSemployee intheDepartment issuspected of havingbreachedtheCode,and

b)theemployeehasbeeninformedofthemattersmentionedin5.3.(a);and c)thematterhasnotyetbeenresolved,and

d) adecisionhasbeenmadethat,apartfromthisclause,theemployeewouldmove to another agency in accordance with section 26 of the Act (including on promotion).

8.2. Unless the Secretary and the new Agency Head agree otherwise, the movement

(includingonpromotion)doesnottakeeffectuntilthematterisresolved.

8.3. Forthepurposeofthisclausethematteristakentoberesolvedwhen:

a)adeterminationinrelationtosuspectedbreachoftheCodeismadeinaccordance withtheseprocedures;or

b)theSecretarydecidesthatadeterminationisnotnecessary.