FOIREQ24/00552 000001
s22
Individual flexibility arrangements
10.
The OAIC and an employee covered by this Agreement may agree to make an individual
flexibility arrangement to vary the effect of terms of the Agreement if:
10.1.
the agreement deals with one or more of the following matters:
10.1.1. arrangements about when work is performed;
10.1.2. overtime rates;
10.1.3. penalty rates;
10.1.4. allowances;
10.1.5. remuneration;
10.1.6. leave and leave loading; and
10.2.
the arrangement meets the genuine needs of the OAIC and employee in relation to
one or more of the matters mentioned in clause 10.1; and
10.3.
the arrangement is genuinely agreed to by the OAIC and employee.
11.
The OAIC must ensure that the terms of the individual flexibility arrangement:
11.1.
are about permitted matters under section 172 of the FW Act;
11.2.
are not unlawful terms under section 194 of the FW Act; and
11.3.
result in the employee being better off overall than the employee would be if no
arrangement was made.
12.
The OAIC must ensure that the individual flexibility arrangement:
12.1.
is in writing;
12.2.
includes the name of the OAIC and employee;
12.3.
is signed by the OAIC and employee and if the employee is under 18 years of age,
signed by a parent or guardian of the employee; and
Page
8 of
76
FOIREQ24/00552 000002
12.4.
includes details of:
12.4.1. the terms of the enterprise agreement that will be varied by the
arrangement;
12.4.2. how the arrangement will vary the effect of the terms;
12.4.3. how the employee will be better off overall in relation to the terms and
conditions of their employment as a result of the arrangement; and
12.5.
states the day on which the arrangement commences.
13.
The OAIC must give the employee a copy of the individual flexibility arrangement within 14
days after it is agreed to.
14.
The OAIC or employee may terminate the individual flexibility arrangement:
14.1.
by giving no more than 28 days written notice to the other party to the
arrangement; or
14.2.
if the OAIC and employee agree in writing – at any time.
15.
The OAIC and employee are to review the individual flexibility arrangement at least every 12
months.
s22
Page
9 of
76
FOIREQ24/00552 000003
The proposed future structure
This section sets out the proposed future structure of the OAIC to the section level. This outlines
the proposed branches for the OAIC and their sections.
Overview of the proposed structure
The proposed organisational structure has been designed to support the OAIC to achieve its
regulatory objectives. This proposed structure seeks to combine elements of privacy and FOI where
practicable while retaining and highlighting regulated area expertise. This proposed structure also
seeks to rebalance the OAIC towards core regulatory work through the inclusion of deputy
commissioners for both FOI and privacy.
The proposed structure (see overleaf) outlines the proposed branches for the OAIC and the sections to
be included in each branch. These sections represent a grouping of functions to be completed by a
group of OAIC staff. In some sections there may be more than one team. Some branches, for example
Regulatory Intelligence and Strategy, may employ a matrix structure for some of their teams, as work
completed across the branch is similar. However, extensive and deep expertise in regulated areas
may be required to develop guidance and policy effectively.
There is also a variance in the level of leadership across branches, this is intended to reflect the level
of risk and workload associated with different branches. The proposed structure, outlined in Figure
11below, displays the intended level of leadership for each branch, and in the case of the Information
Rights division, grouping of branches. This proposed structure includes two SES2, who in addition to
their management and leadership role over their branch, have a dual role working as deputy to the
FOI and Privacy Commissioner. The proposed structure also proposes the implementation of
principal directors to lead smaller branches (and possibly larger or more complex functions within
branches), where appropriate.
The communities of practice (CoPs) are intended as a support to cross-branch information and
process sharing across the agency. These may include CoPs to support:
• Operational Intelligence and Analytics
• CDR
• Digital ID
The CDR and Digital ID CoPs if implemented would be intended as transitional supports for the teams
completing this work to support their integration into BAU activity across the OAIC.
Designing the Future OAIC
Page 29
oaic.gov.au
FOIREQ24/00552 000004
Figure 11 | Proposed OAIC future structure
Designing the Future OAIC
Page 30
oaic.gov.au
FOIREQ24/00552 000005
Executive team
Implementing the Commissioners’ strategic intent and responding to the OAIC’s changed operating environment require the OAIC to adjust the staffing
profile and roles of its executive teams, as well as reducing the overall size of the executive.
Each branch would be led by an SES1 General Manager or a Principal Director (an EL2 whose responsibilities and remuneration sit at the mid-point
between an EL2 and SES1 role). The change in title of SES1 employees from Assistant Commissioner to General Manager is intended to signify a
rebalance in focus from subject-matter (FOI and privacy) and operational decision making, towards leadership and strategic management for these
roles.
The exception in this model would be two proposed new SES2 Executive General Manager/Deputy Commissioner positions, who have a dual
responsibility of leading functional areas and teams, but also serving as the Deputy to the FOI Commissioner and Privacy Commissioner. Below, the
proposed SES positions are described in connection to the divisions and branches they are proposed to lead.
Executive support arrangements would also change, with the OAIC’s executive assistants moving to the proposed Office of the Commissioner.
s22
Designing the Future OAIC
Page 31
oaic.gov.au
FOIREQ24/00552 000006
The proposed future structure
This section sets out the proposed future structure of the OAIC to the section level. This outlines
the proposed branches for the OAIC and their sections.
Overview of the proposed structure
The proposed organisational structure has been designed to support the OAIC to achieve its
regulatory objectives. This structure seeks to combine elements of privacy and FOI where practicable
while retaining and highlighted regulated area expertise. This structure also seeks to rebalance the
OAIC towards core regulatory work through the inclusion of deputy commissioners for both FOI and
privacy.
The proposed structure (see overleaf) outlines the proposed branches for the OAIC and the sections to
be included in each branch. These sections represent a grouping of functions to be completed by a
group of OAIC staff. In some sections there may be more than one team. Some branches, for example
Regulatory Intelligence and Strategy, may employ a matrix structure for some of their teams, as work
completed across the branch is similar, however extensive and deep expertise in regulated areas may
be required to develop guidance and policy effectively.
There is also a variance in the level of leadership across branches, this is intended to reflect the level
of risk and workload associated with different branches. The proposed structure, outlined in Figure 16
, displays the intended level of leadership for each branch, and in the case of the Information Rights
division, grouping of branches. This structure includes 2 SES2, who in addition to their management
and leadership role over their branch, have a dual role working as deputy to the FOI and Privacy
Commissioner. The structure also proposes the implementation of principal directors to lead smaller
branches (and possibly larger or more complex functions within branches), where appropriate.
The communities of practice (CoPs) are intended as a support to cross-branch information and
process sharing across the Agency. These may include CoPs to support:
• Operational Intelligence and Analytics
• CDR
• Digital ID
The CDR and Digital ID CoPs if implemented would be intended as transitional supports for the teams
completing this work to support its integration into BAU activity across the OAIC.
Designing the Future OAIC
Page 37
oaic.gov.au
FOIREQ24/00552 000007
Figure 16 | Proposed OAIC future structure
Designing the Future OAIC
Page 38
oaic.gov.au
FOIREQ24/00552 000008
Executive team
Implementing the Commissioners’ strategic intent and responding to the OAIC’s changed operating environment requires the OAIC to adjust the staffing
profile and roles of its executive teams, as well as reducing the overall size of the executive.
Each branch would be led by an SES1 General Manager or a Principal Director (an EL2 whose responsibilities and remuneration sit at the mid-point
between an EL2 and SES1 role). The change in title of SES1 employees from Assistant Commissioner to General Manager is intended to signify a
rebalance in focus from subject-matter (FOI and privacy) and operational decision making, towards leadership and strategic management for these
roles.
The exception, in this model would be two proposed new SES2 Executive General Manager/Deputy Commissioner positions, who have a dual
responsibility of leading a functional areas and teams, but also serving as the Deputy to the FOI Commissioner and Privacy Commissioner. Below, the
proposed SES positions are described in connection to the divisions and branches they are proposed to lead below.
Executive support arrangements will also change, with the OAIC’s executive assistants moving to the proposed Office of the Commissioner.
s22
Designing the Future OAIC
Page 39
oaic.gov.au
FOIREQ24/00552 000010
From:
McClintock, Jane
To:
TYDD,Liz; KIND,Carly; PIRANI,Toni; BOAG,Annan; BUI,Anh
Cc:
Moran, Celeste; Sharp, Scott; Orr, Dianne; Dawson, Bridie
Subject:
Agenda and meeting note: OAIC-AGD meeting 930AM Friday 20 September [SEC=PROTECTED, CAVEAT=SH:CABINET]
Date:
Thursday, 19 September 2024 4:03:15 PM
Attachments:
image001.jpg
image002.png
Some people who received this message don't often get email from xxxx.xxxxxxxxxx@xx.xxx.xx. Learn why this is
important
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.
PROTECTED//CABINET
Hello everyone
Please find attached for tomorrow’s meeting at 930AM the proposed agenda. Below is the meeting record
from 2 September 2024.
Di Orr is an apology for the meeting.
Regards
Jane
Jane McClintock
Director|Freedom of Information Section
Information Law Branch | Integrity Frameworks Division
Australian Attorney-General’s Department
3-5 National Circuit Barton ACT 2600
s47E(d)
|www.ag.gov.au
2586 Indigenous signature block NEW (3)
AGD – OAIC Senior Executive Meeting
2 September 2024, 4:30-5:00pm, Simon Newham’s Office, Level 3, 3-5 National Circuit +
Microsoft Teams
Meeting purpose / Subject: To discuss the OAIC’s budget and financial position, options for the OAIC
to reduce expenditure, and human resources and organisational management issues arising.
Attendees
FOIREQ24/00552 000011
Attorney-General’s Department
Simon Newnham, Deputy Secretary, Integrity and International Group
Scott Sharp, Chief Finance Officer
Bridie Dawson, Chief People Officer
Celeste Moran, First Assistant Secretary, Integrity Frameworks Division
Jane McClintock, A/g Assistant Secretary, Information Law Branch
Office of the Australian Information Commissioner
Elizabeth Tydd, Information Commissioner
Rocelle Ago, Freedom of Information Commissioner
Anh Bui, A/g Chief Financial Officer
Annan Boag, Assistant Commissioner, Digital ID & Implementation
Item 1 Welcome
SN: Welcomed and thanked OAIC for sending the presentation ‘OAIC budget position and restructure’.
Acknowledged that significant progress has been made.
Item 2 Budget- financial update
AnnanB: Noted a $1.02m non-structural deficit. This provides OAIC a manageable margin.
s47E(d)
Item 3: options
SN: Noting all had received and reviewed the presentation, the discussion would focus on key issues/by
exception.
AnnanB: Advised the approach to budget management and reduction and the objectives of modelling were
to achieve manageable deficits to minimise disruption to the organisation and maintain internal staff
expertise. Also noted that supplier expenditure had aligned with forecasts so they have confidence in the
modelling.
SS: had reviewed and spoke to Ahn and Annan about the approach and agreed the assumptions are
reasonable.
SN: Noted the likely deficit without action of $14m is significant, so the presentation and advice shows good
progress by the OAIC.
BD: Noted that in discussions about managing costs OAIC had used the term ‘recruitment freeze’. Advised
caution with this messaging as it may result in alternative behaviour by staff and reduce average turnover.
Further as OAIC may need to recruit external expertise for specific roles, it may create internal discord if
some areas fill a role when other thought they could not.
AnnanB: Agreed, and noted that term had been used for the presentation to us, which is for internal
discussions, but has not been used for staff structure conversations and OAIC will be nuanced in messaging
for staff.
Item 4: Other items – OAIC structure
FOIREQ24/00552 000012
s47E(c)
ET: The proposed OAIC structure that staff will be consulted on tomorrow. Key changes in the structure
include re-prioritised casework, including introduction of SES band 2. Proposed to reduce from five to four
SES band 1: with two in case work to recognise synergies and differences. The Regulatory Intelligence and
Strategy area is different to current approach. The intention is this area will establish a forward program of
work so the OAIC can be proactive in its regulatory approach. There will be a reduction in the size of
Enabling Services. At the moment it includes IT, data, and legal – so it will need to reduce in scope. The legal
area will therefore be moved out separately and experience the biggest structural and budget impact,
reducing from 17/18 people to five, and a budget reduction of $8m to $2.5m. Another area that will be
impacted is CDR assessments. The team will decrease in number, but intelligence and capability will move
to Regulatory Intelligence area.
SN: Noted that the numbers looked balanced and had contemplated a range of current issues and future
needs.
ET: Noted that priority of case work is retained in the structure. Action is focusing on maximising the front
end through early assessment at intake of eligibility with a view to finalise in 30 days. This will maximise
impact and then enable litigation and enforcement resources to be focused on the important cases.
RA: Noted there had already been significant achievement in reduced backlog of cases from 2200 to 1850.
The proposed structure keeps a focus on case management and will position FOI team to reduce the
backlog.
BD: Noted the use of Principal Directors (IFA’d EL2s). This is common in smaller agencies as it helps to retain
good staff and manage SES caps. Advised OAIC to make clear in communications to staff that these Principal
Directors have additional responsibilities and expectations, and ensure this can be seen in operational
practice.
ET: Noted the feedback from staff engagement that they have too many EL1 and EL2s, so there will be a
rebalancing in this over the next 12 months.
SN: Noted the approach being employed to ensure that there are no surprises for OAIC.
ET: Advised that they had engaged with AGO advisor (Natasha) providing her with some information about
the approaches and timeframes before Natasha’s leave. The new advisor has been left a message. Will call
to advise her that OAIC staff will be interested in privacy reforms and will be engaged on the proposed new
structure from tomorrow.
ET: Advised Commissioner Kind will be well enough on Friday 6 September to present to the agency heads
meeting about OAIC’s approach going forward.
Meeting concluded.
PROTECTED//CABINET
If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return e-mail and
delete all copies. If this e-mail or any attachments have been sent to you in error, that error does not
constitute waiver of any confidentiality, privilege or copyright in respect of information in the e-mail
or attachments.
