Having clear procedures for managing underperformance is essential in supporting workforce productivity and maintaining employee engagement. The Australian Government Fair Work Ombudsman states that underperformance can be exhibited through:
- unsatisfactory work performance, that is, a failure to perform the duties of the position or to perform them to the standard required;
- non-compliance with workplace policies, rules or procedures;
- unacceptable behaviour in the workplace; and/or
- disruptive or negative behaviour that impacts on co-workers[1].
The focus of the Performance Framework is to support employee effectiveness for the benefit of the ACTPS through providing a consistent and sustainable approach to achieving high performance standards. Where an underperformance issue is initially identified, managers and supervisors are required to address the concerns with the employee informally and provide assistance to help the employee to achieve the required standard of performance. Where underperformance continues to be an issue, a formal performance action plan is developed under the enterprise agreements.
Directorates were asked to identify whether they monitored the number of preliminary performance discussions held during the 2018-19 reporting year. Of the eight directorates, five reported that they did monitor preliminary performance discussions. Between these directorates twenty-three preliminary discussions occurred during the reporting year all of which resulted in employees realising the required improvements. These cases did not proceed to a formal underperformance process.
Directorates were asked to provide details of the number of formal underperformance processes that were commenced in the 2018-19 reporting year under the procedures set out in the relevant ACTPS Enterprise Agreement. The results are provided in Table 26.
| Total Processes |
---|---|
Number commenced in 2017-18 but finalised in 2018-19 | 10 |
Number commenced in 2018-19 | 28 |
Number commenced and finalised in 2018-19 | 23 |
Number commenced in 2018-19 and to be finalised at 30 June 2019 | 6 |
Four of the eight directorates indicated that they have commenced at least one formal underperformance process as set out in the relevant Enterprise Agreement during the 2018-19 reporting year. The commencement of 28 new underperformance processes during the 2018-19 reporting year is a small increase from the 2017-18 figures, where a total of 24 new underperformance cases commenced.
Directorates were also asked to report on the outcomes of the underperformance processes that were finalised during 2018-19. These results are provided in Table 27.
| Total Outcomes |
---|---|
Satisfactory performance achieved at the completion of the process | 17 |
Development program instituted | 1 |
Assignment to other duties | 1 |
Deferral of increment | 0 |
Reduction in classification | 2 |
Termination of employment | 1 |
Resignation of employee during process | 9 |
It is recognised that a formal underperformance process can be a stressful experience for employees. Employees are provided with assistance, coaching, support and confidential access to Employee Assistance Providers throughout these processes. Positively, the majority of employees involved in these processes were able to either return to a satisfactory level of performance in their role (seventeen employees achieved satisfactory performance and one employee was placed on a development plan), or were re-allocated to a role more suited to their capabilities (one employee was assigned to other duties and two employees were assigned to a lower classification).
[1] Australian Government, Fair Work Ombudsman, Managing Underperformance