ɫ������

The ɫ������met with Health Professional Councils Authority at the Joint Consultative Committee (JCC) meeting on 23 September 2026.

The meeting provided an opportunity to discuss concerns raised by members at the member meeting held on 12 August 2026.

Flexible Work Policy Compliance Procedure

The ɫ������sought an update on the Flexible Work Policy Compliance Procedure, noting that feedback previously provided by members had not yet received a response.

The ɫ������provided additional examples for management to consider and advised that it had prepared a four-page “Misalignment Document” identifying:

• Significant differences between the existing policy and the proposed procedure.
• Risks arising from the current draft.
• Concerns regarding how the procedure could operate in practice.
• Opportunities to develop a more balanced procedure.

The ɫ������emphasised that it:

• Accepts that procedures are required.
• Wants to work collaboratively with Health Professional Councils Authority to develop an effective procedure.
• Is concerned about inconsistencies in how flexible work is being managed between directors/areas.
• Believes a properly drafted procedure could help reduce those inconsistencies.

Management advised that it is currently consulting with the Ministry IR team and is working through the feedback received.

No firm timeframe was provided.

The ɫ������highlighted that staff have been waiting for some time and are asking for updates.

Working-from-home concerns

The ɫ������raised concerns that some members are experiencing disadvantage in accessing flexible/working-from-home arrangements.

Management responded that its position is that the overwhelming majority of Health Professional Councils Authority staff are able to work flexibly through a combination of office and home-based work.

Management also indicated that individual exceptions need to be considered on their circumstances and maintained that the examples raised did not represent the experience of the overwhelming majority of staff.

The ɫ������clarified that it was not seeking to discuss individual cases in detail but was using examples to demonstrate potential problems with how the policy/procedure is being implemented.

The ɫ������handed over the additional documentation/examples to Health Professional Councils Authority and  forwarded the Misalignment document for consideration.

Management agreed to consider the material and provide updates when available.

The ɫ������emphasised the importance of maintaining timely communication with staff.

Consultation regarding movement of employees between teams

The ɫ������raised significant concerns regarding consultation when employees or positions are moved between teams.

Concerns raised included:

• Employees being moved between teams without meaningful consultation.
• Decisions allegedly being made before feedback is sought.
• Management allegedly confirming decisions shortly after consultation.
• Employees being called into meetings without knowing the purpose.
• Team Leaders and Executive Officers allegedly not being meaningfully involved.
• Employees being moved despite the original team continuing to require the position.
• Concerns about the psychosocial impact of poorly managed staff movements.
• Changes to roles occurring without adequate consultation.

Management strongly requested specific examples so the issues could be investigated.

Management advised that Health Professional Councils Authority needs sufficient detail to determine:

• What occurred.
• When consultation occurred.
• Who was consulted.
• How the decision was made.
• How the decision was communicated.

Management also rejected the broad assertion that there had been widespread failures to consult.

Management emphasised that Health Professional Councils Authority has an operational need to:

• Move staff between teams.
• Respond to workload pressures
• Allocate resources across teams.

The ɫ������confirmed that it does not dispute management’s ability to move staff where operationally required.

The concern is specifically about how the process is undertaken and whether consultation is meaningful.

Examples discussed

The ɫ������referred to two particular instances where staff had allegedly been significantly affected by moves between teams.

The ɫ������also provided an example of a group of employees who wanted to meet collectively with a director to explain why proposed movements might not be effective or efficient.

The concern was that:

• The employees were not given an opportunity to make their collective case.
• Individual discussions occurred after employees believed the decision had already been made.
• Employees felt their operational knowledge and proposed alternatives had not genuinely been considered.

The ɫ������said that management may ultimately decide to proceed with a move, but staff should still have an opportunity to provide meaningful input before the decision is finalised.

The ɫ������will provide specific examples of the consultation concerns.

Management agreed to consider the examples and provide a response addressing the relevant consultation process.

Compass User Group

The ɫ������raised concerns about the current structure of the Compass User Group.

The ɫ������raised concerns that operational employees who directly use Compass were reportedly underrepresented.

Concerns included:

• Participation being concentrated among higher-level employees, including EOs and Team Leaders.
• Information discussed at the User Group not consistently filtering back to operational employees.
• Previous Compass user groups having broader representation across classifications.
• Operational staff being well placed to identify practical problems with the system.
• Operational users wanting to contribute directly to solutions.

Management initially indicated that operational staff could raise issues with their Team Leader or EO, who could then take the matter to the User Group.

The ɫ������explained that some EOs themselves reportedly do not feel they know the system sufficiently to represent the operational issues.

The ɫ������said some EOs support having operational users involved because:

• They perform the actual tasks.
• They understand the practical problems.
• They can identify solutions.
• They have direct experience with Compass.

Management advised that the focus of the User Group has recently shifted more towards:

• Sharing knowledge.
• Sharing information.
• Explaining how the system is used.
• Supporting business processes.

Management agreed to take the issue on notice and consider whether there should be greater representation from operational staff.

The ɫ������also noted that managers participating in the group should raise concerns with the chair if they believe representation is inadequate.

Health Professional Councils Authority workload

The ɫ������raised concerns regarding workload, particularly in the context of:

• Staffing reductions.
• Increased workload associated with Compass.
• Staff concerns about outstanding Compass issues.
• The impact of system problems on day-to-day work.

The ɫ������undertook to obtain more specific examples and information from members.

Management said that several workload indicators have been trending downward, including:

• Complaint numbers.
• Cases.
• Matters referred to councils.
• Regulatory hearings.
• Number of practitioners being monitored.

Management also referred to financial data indicating reduced expenditure by councils on regulatory activities.

Temporary roles/project roles

Management explained that temporary positions had previously been created to:

• Provide additional capacity.
• Support regulatory teams.
• Assist with Compass implementation.

Management advised that the number of these roles had reduced from 12 to 6 in June/July.

The remaining roles are currently expected to continue until 2027.

Compass tickets

The ɫ������asked how many outstanding Compass tickets/issues currently require resolution.

Management indicated that it has access to the relevant data but did not provide a number during the meeting.

The ɫ������noted that members continue to report a high number of unresolved system issues.

There was recognition that Compass workload and regulatory workload are separate measures, although both can affect staff perceptions of workload.

The discussion identified a possible communication gap between management’s data and the experience being reported by staff.

The ɫ������suggested that if management can provide information about the downward workload trends, this could be communicated to staff, so they better understand the broader workload picture.

WHS Committee and psychosocial hazards

The ɫ������raised concerns about the effectiveness and visibility of the WHS Committee.

Members reportedly felt:

• They were not receiving sufficient information about the committee’s work.
• WHS issues were not being addressed in a sufficiently timely way.
• The committee appeared to focus significantly on wellbeing matters rather than broader WHS issues.
• There was insufficient visibility around psychosocial hazards.

The ɫ������placed particular emphasis on the requirement for workplaces to address psychosocial risks.

The ɫ������explained that it expected Health Professional Councils Authority to have a process involving:

1. Identifying psychosocial hazards.
2. Consulting staff about those hazards.
3. Assessing the risks.
4. Developing controls.
5. Establishing an action plan.
6. Monitoring whether the controls are effective.

Examples of psychosocial hazards and workplace issues could be identified through staff surveys/audits.

The ɫ������stressed that this should be evidence-based and aligned with SafeWork NSW requirements.

Health and Safety Representatives

The ɫ������raised the possibility of employees electing Health and Safety Representatives (HSRs) if the existing committee was not adequately addressing workplace health and safety issues.

The ɫ������explained that HSRs can have formal powers under WHS legislation.

Management explained that the existing WHS Committee consists of:

• Nominated representatives from different business areas.
• Representatives from areas such as People and Culture, Communications and corporate governance/risk.
• A Director acting as Chair.
• Administrative/secretariat support.

The Terms of Reference for the committee are currently being reviewed.

WHS committee training

Management advised that WHS Committee members had recently undertaken WHS Committee training.

The ɫ������welcomed this.

There was some discussion about the amount of notice given for the training. Management offered to investigate individual cases where members believed they had not received sufficient notice.

Ministry resources

Management advised that Health Professional Councils Authority has access to Ministry health and safety resources and tools.

The ɫ������noted that it had recently seen similar resources through Ministry JCC discussions and encouraged Health Professional Councils Authority to make staff aware of the available resources.

Temporary employees

The ɫ������raised concerns regarding the use of temporary employees for work that appears to be ongoing.

One example was provided of a member who had reportedly been employed temporarily for approximately 3.5 years.

Management explained that temporary employment can be used for various reasons, including:

• Project roles.
• Interim strategy roles.
• Compass-related work.
• Backfilling staff on parental leave or other leave.
• Temporary internal assignments.
• Staff secondments.

Management explained that a temporary role does not necessarily mean the underlying work is ongoing and suitable for conversion to an ongoing position.

Recruitment/talent pools

The ɫ������identified potential confusion from members around:

• Talent pools.
• Temporary employment.
• Recruitment processes.
• How long people can remain in temporary roles.
• Whether employees can be considered for ongoing positions.

The ɫ������said the issue appeared to be a recurring source of confusion and suggested there may be inconsistent understanding between HR and hiring managers.

The ɫ������offered to assist in communicating accurate information to members once the process is clarified.

Management advised that Health Professional Councils Authority has undertaken significant work to improve recruitment information only four weeks ago including:

• Recruitment information sessions.
• Online information.
• Information about talent pools.
• Updated recruitment guidance.
• A refreshed recruitment matrix explaining how roles can be filled under the relevant legislation.

The recruitment matrix had recently been presented at an all-staff meeting.

The ɫ������welcomed this and indicated that better information may address some of the recurring concerns.

Interim strategy / Grade 5/6 recruitment pool

A specific issue was raised regarding employees acting in higher-level roles for extended periods.

The concern was that some employees had reportedly been acting in roles for 2–4 years, while a relevant recruitment pool had expired.

The PSA’s concern was that:

• Employees acting in higher-level positions could be disadvantaged if a permanent vacancy arose.
• Employees may have been waiting for recruitment processes/pools to be established.
• Some members had reportedly raised the issue months earlier.

Management explained that:

• Current talent pools are monitored.
• A new talent pool does not necessarily need to be created if an existing suitable pool is available.
• Recruitment processes are undertaken according to organisational need.
• A recent recruitment process had been undertaken for another classification where there was a current need.
• Management continues to monitor recruitment requirements.

Monitoring team / proposed business process changes

The ɫ������raised an issue concerning proposed changes to work undertaken by the Health Professional Councils Authority monitoring team, particularly around notices and notification of conditions.

The ɫ������referred to information suggesting that monitoring officers may take over certain functions currently performed by case management teams.

The proposed process would involve monitoring officers:

• Verifying conditions uploaded by council teams.
• Sending notices to relevant bodies.
• Notifying employers and practitioners following the imposition, amendment or removal of conditions.

The ɫ������raised concerns that:

• Monitoring staff may already have significant workloads.
• Staffing reductions and temporary role changes could increase pressure.
• Staff may not have received sufficient training.
• There may be uncertainty about the legal distinction between different notification obligations.
• The process could involve significant manual work.
• Compass may currently require multiple accounts or manual entry of employment information.
• Staff reported that completing employment information and generating notices could take significant time.
• Some information may need to be manually verified with hospitals/employers.

Management clarified that the proposed change has not yet been implemented.

The change is part of an effort to:

• Harmonise business processes.
• Improve consistency across teams.
• Take advantage of Compass functionality.

Management advised that change management processes will be used to assess:

• What is changing.
• The impact on staff.
• Whether training is required.
• Whether procedures need to be developed.
• How implementation should occur.

Management also identified Rebecca, the Principal responsible for the monitoring area, as leading the work.

Management explained that some Compass functionality has not yet been switched on.

This includes portals that will eventually allow practitioners and other users to enter information directly.

For example, once the practitioner portal is operational, practitioners will be able to enter their employment information themselves rather than Health Professional Councils Authority staff manually creating that information.

Management acknowledged that the current manual process is burdensome but described it as a temporary issue while additional Compass functionality is being implemented.

The ɫ������raised a broader concern that staff may not understand:

• What Compass can currently do.
• What it cannot yet do.
• What enhancements are coming.
• Why certain manual processes remain necessary.
• When changes are expected.

The ɫ������suggested that clearer communication about future enhancements could reduce frustration and stress among staff.

Management agreed to take this on notice and review how Compass enhancements and upcoming changes are communicated.

Management also agreed to:

• Examine the impact of the proposed monitoring changes.
• Ensure workload impacts are properly assessed.
• Consider whether staff will require additional support/training.

Incident reporting

The ɫ������discussed incident reporting and noted an apparent discrepancy between:

• Issues members report directly to the PSA; and
• Incidents formally reported through Health Professional Councils Authority’s incident reporting system.

Management advised that work had previously been undertaken to promote the incident reporting process and educate staff about how it works.

The discussion highlighted the importance of encouraging staff to formally report incidents so that issues can be identified and addressed.

Anti-bullying training

Jill O’Meara speaking in her capacity as a ɫ������member, raised a potential initiative involving ɫ������anti-bullying training.

She explained that the ɫ������provides training addressing:

• What constitutes bullying.
• What does not constitute bullying.
• The distinction between bullying and reasonable management action.
• How employees should understand and respond to bullying concerns.

Management appeared receptive to the suggestion and agreed it was something that could potentially be considered and we’re happy for it to be shared.

Contacts

Member Support Centre

Rachel Eldred Organiser

Monika Wunderlund Industrial Officer

Tracey Valentino Acting Industrial Officer