Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee, , 39:04 to 42:33
Discussion on the costs associated with voluntary redundancies, incentives to retire for Senior Executive Service officers, and the termination benefit paid to the former Secretary.
Topics: Public service staffing, Government spending
Speakers: Senator Paul Scarr, Ben Sladic, Catherine Rule, Erin Cockram, Unknown Speaker, Senator Marielle Smith, Speaker 9
I think by the time we got to the end of the year there was certainly fewer staff and I think that goes to some of what the Secretary was saying in his opening statement around what we're doing to um make our workforce levels overall more sustainable and more affordable.
Okay. So that's reflected in the separations and redundancy figure going up more than doubling from the year before that's shown in the financial statements I think you'll you'll see that in the notes okay and how many people does that cover and I know the Secretary touched on this but how many people are we talking about is that that figure of 90 you talked about voluntary redundancy Secretary I think you said there were 91 acceptances out of 101 offers how uh how many of those within this annual report?
The statement from the Secretary was in relation to the round that we're currently running financial year 2627 in the financial statements what we what you'll see is the accrual value of the separation And redundancy payments that we've paid for that financial year. Okay.
Are you referring to the 25-26 financial year, Senator?
Correct. So in that 12.9 million dollar figure.
So in the 2526 financial year, we had 103 voluntary redundancies.
Okay. How many were at SES level?
None because SES aren't eligible for voluntary redundancies. They're eligible for what's called an incentive to retire, and there were five of those.
Five.
Yes.
Five actually exited the department during 25-26. And just to make sure it's clear for you, Senator, what we represent in the financial statements, the accrual value, which sometimes there can be a crossover between when an offer was accepted and when a person exited the actual department. So just to make sure you attribute distinction. But Ms. Rule's just giving you the figure for physical exits.
So those five people, officers who accepted the incentives to retire. Are any amounts attributable to the or contained within the 12.9 million? Or is it in a different line item? Do you understand what I'm saying? Because it says it says separations and redundancy. So isn't acceptance of an incentive to retire? Is that a separation?
Yes, it is a separation. I do understand the question. I'm just looking to my colleagues to see where we included it in as a line item.
The 12 point nine million is our total separations and redundancy cost for 2526 on an accruals basis. So those don't have the exact dates at those five.
No, no, not looking for the exact dates. But if they were, if an amount were attributable to that financial year in relation to an incentive to retire, it would be included in that line item.
Yes, it would.
Okay, understood. That's fine. Last question. Thank you, Chair. And does that 12.9 million dollars include the former Secretary's $828,980 termination benefit?
Yes, it does, Senator.
The whole amount?
Yes.
Or just part of it?
No, the whole amount.
The whole amount, yeah. Okay. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you. Senator Delegate Cool.
Thank you.