1a - business case for significant change | townsville hhs ... · web viewbusiness case for...

BUSINESS CASE FOR SIGNIFICANT CHANGE Health Safety & Wellness Department1. PurposeThis document provides an overview of the business case for the proposed reorganisation of the Health Safety & Wellness (HSW) Department, following recent endorsement by the Board of recommendations within the external Livingstones’ Review of the HSW function. It is intended to support informed consultation in relation to the proposed changes identified and invites feedback from affected employees and relevant unions on these proposed changes.

The Health Safety & Wellness Department is proposing change in accordance with government policy, the agreed Change Management Guidelines and relevant industrial obligations.

2. BackgroundIn late 2018, the THHS requested an external organisational review of the HSW function and processes by Livingstones Australia. The catalyst for the review was the increase in the WorkCover premium. In the financial year 2016-2017 the premium was $4,968,036. The premium for the financial year 2018-2019 is $7,153,444. This represents an increase of approximately 44% over two years.

The purpose of the review was to assess the current effectiveness of the HSW function in relation to its ability to help mitigate and drive down the escalating premium over time and determine what transformational changes need to be considered to leverage a higher level of safety performance for the THHS. The review included all HSW related activities, systems and processes however excluded OVP.

Based on information from WorkCover Queensland, three major contributing factors were identified in relation to the significant premium increase. These are wages growth, length of claim duration and common law costs. THHS claim cost experience is identified as the past three years of statutory claim costs, followed by the preceding one year of common law claim costs (going back four years in total).

While the growth of wages for THSS is outside of the scope of influence of the HSW team, the other two factors can and must be positively influenced. It is noted that strategies to reduce the premium will therefore not result in an immediate reduction, however if successful, will likely see a reduction in premium from financial year 2020-21.

Townsville Hospital and Health Service

“1A”

3. Reason for ChangeA reduction in WorkCover premiums and other costs associated with workplace injuries will only be realised over the longer period as the organisation deliberately embeds strategies that actively influence it downward. Maintaining a high safety performance level is an imperative and will require a specialist focus by HSW on proactive / prevention activities and the adoption of very early intervention practices in relation to rehabilitation and RTW. This in turn will require resource agility as, and where, effort is needed.

The Livingstones Report provided 19 recommendations which have now been reviewed and assessed. Some have been determined as a key priority for adoption and change. The key benefit for THHS from a financial perspective, in terms of reduced premium costs in the medium to long-term, will be realised if they are successfully implemented. The report has now been endorsed by the Executive Corporate and Strategic Governance Committee (ECSGC) and the THHS Board.

The priority recommendations related to this change proposal are summarised below:

a. A strategic approach is needed to reduce the two major causal factors for workplace injuries at THHS - muscular skeletal disorders and psychological injuries.

b. Engage a temporary full-time resource for 3 months to review and update the job dictionary / job and task analysis for high risk activities. This is an essential tool to support induction / orientation processes, as well as independent medical assessments, and inform decisions in relation to RTW.

c. HP staff in HSW should be utilised more to assist in RTW and rehabilitation matters.

d. Commence a formal change management process to review the HSW structure and roles with a view to separating the safety and rehabilitation functions of the safety partners roles, to ensure a high focus on prevention and education as part of a new HSW service model. Related to recommendation (a).

e. The recommendation is to re-assign one of the HSW roles. This will be considered as part of the overall HSW functional review outlined at recommendation (d) above.

f. The recommendation is to provide adequate resources to support the new service model. This will be considered as part of the overall HSW functional review at recommendation (d) above.

The endorsed recommendation that will result in the most significant organisational change to the HSW Department is recommendation (d) above. A review of the HSW structure and roles with a view to separating the safety and rehabilitation functions of the safety partners roles will ensure a high focus on prevention and education as part of a revised HSW service delivery model.

4. OptionsThis business case outlines two options to achieve optimised implementation as follows:

1. No change and the risks involved with not making change2. Implementation of Endorsed Recommendations – Option 23. Implementation of Endorsed Recommendations – Option 3

Option 1 – No changeWhat? Maintain business as usual in the HSW Department with no change to

current structure. Benefits NilImplications Increased premium costs in the medium to long-term.

Increased injuries and injury severity in the workplace.

Continued lack of focus on proactive safety.

Dual reporting to the Safety & Rehab team leaders for the safety partners will continue to cause a lack of clarity for accountability, performance management, leave management and recruitment.


Option 2 – Implementation of Endorsed Recommendations (Recommended)What? Adopt selected recommendations outlined in the Livingstones Report as

endorsed by the ECSGC and the THHS Board.

Option 2 separates the safety and rehabilitation functions by assigning the current safety partners into one of the two functional streams with a direct reporting line to the respective team leader rather than the dual reporting situation that currently exists. A single role description requiring minor changes only incorporates both safety and injury management functions. This by its nature, allows sustainable flexibility and agility within the broader team that enables the priority demands of the HSW Team/Board/Executive to be easily shifted as needed without further change into the future.

The WHS Systems Advisor role operates across all functions in the Department. To ensure full accountability for all WHS related systems, the responsibility for all RiskMan activities and reporting will be re-allocated to this role. In addition, it is recommended that this role become a ‘System Administrator’ for the RiskMan Injury Management module. (see Attachment 4b for the draft role description)

In this option, the WHS Systems Advisor will report to the Director of HSW to ensure that the WHS Management System function underpins all HSW activity across the department.

The Wellness Team are health practitioners and will be better utilised to provide advice and assistance on injury management and proactive injury prevention. To assist with the increase in function, it is recommended to increase the Team Leader of Wellness from 0.74 FTE to 1.0 FTE on a permanent basis.

Recommendation (b) outlines the need for an additional resource for 3 months to assist with the job dictionary. This may need to be considered for a longer period to ensure completion of this task. A minimum of 12 months would achieve the recommendation as this body of work aligns to several components of the HSW function.

Attachment 2 provides the proposed organisational structure for this option.

Attachment 1 is the current organisational structure for comparison.

Attachment 4 includes copies of the draft role descriptions for the following positions:

a. Safety & Injury Management Advisor

b. WHS Systems Advisor

c. Team Leader Health & Safety

d. Team Leader Rehabilitation & Injury Management

Benefits Reduced premium costs in the medium to long-term.

Reduced injuries and injury severity in the workplace.

Improved incident investigations and lessons learnt.

Enhanced focus on safety performance with time and resources dedicated to proactive safety activities and education.

Greater agility through flexibility of the Safety and Injury Management functions and ability to reallocate staff to the function requiring priorities resourcing at the time. It is proposed this is reviewed annually to ensure consistency of management.

Enhanced management of return to work through improved stakeholder engagement with Service Group Directors and operational Line Managers.

Increased interaction by the Wellness team with frontline workforce.


Team Leaders would now have specific singular functional teams to control and manage rather than the current dual responsibility roles.

The management of complex cases, QSuper and IME governance and oversight would be owned and controlled by the Team Leader Rehabilitation & Injury Management.

Common Law Cases will be able to be reduced by proactive Health and Safety interaction and intervention by identifying and addressing causal factors that led to unwanted hazards injuring staff in the work place.

If the service model within HSW team is re-aligned, it will ensure the appropriate focus and balance between proactive injury prevention and education activities, as well as sound injury management processes.

The AO5 Senior Safety Advisor role will have expanded capacity to fulfil proactive safety activities with the removal of RiskMan responsibilities.

Implications Sick Leave, annual leave, AVAC’s and Flexible Work Arrangements may disrupt service to Stakeholders without having access to backfill as other frontline staff do. This would need to be carefully managed if no staffing backfill provision is built in for critical HSW functions.

A reduction in the number of staff assigned to injury management may result in an increased workload on these staff while case load is still high.

The increased workload could be minimised if an additional AO role was considered as part of the resource review to assist with the high administrative burden resulting from the high QSuper caseload. A strategy to offset this burden needs to be further investigated.

Potential disharmony in the HSW team unless there is clear understanding of the department’s purpose, aims and objectives including how the HP roles in Wellness will be utilised to drive sustainable change.

Option 3 – Implementation of Endorsed Recommendations What? Adopt selected recommendations outlined in the Livingstones Report as

endorsed by the ECSGC and THHS Board as per Option 2 above with the following changes which align to recommendation (e).

In Option 3, the WHS Systems Advisor role would be re-assigned to work alongside the Workforce Systems coordinator role within Human Resources to ensure greater synergy and centralised HRE coordination of operational systems across the HRE Directorate. This will also help to ensure that duplications of effect in reporting area are addressed.

Attachment 3 provides the proposed organisational structure for this option.

Attachment 1 is the current organisational structure for comparison.

Attachment 4 includes copies of the draft role descriptions.

Benefits As per Option 2.

Option 3 will provide greater synergy coverage and continuity during times of annual leave for the WHS Systems Advisor.

Option 3 will allow for enhanced collaboration and alignment of all management systems and reporting throughout the HRE Division.

Implications As per Option 2.


RisksRefer to the documents to complete the risk assessment table below.

Risk Analysis MatrixTownsville HHS Risk Management PolicyAuthor’s Risk Assessment Guide for Briefing Notes

Risk Description Current Risk Rating Mitigation Strategies Target Risk Rating

Option 1 - No Change:

Potential Risk if change is not approved

Area of Impact: People

Consequence: Moderate (3)

Likelihood:Likely (4)

Risk rating:High (12-16)

- Implement a management of change process as per business case.


Consequence: Minor (2)

Likelihood:Unlikely (2)

Risk rating:Low (1-5)

Option 2 – Implementation of Endorsed Recommendations (recommended):

Potential Risk if change is approved



Likelihood:Possible (3)

Risk rating:Medium (6-10)

- Ensure staffing backfill provision is built in for critical HSW functions.

- Increased resources in HSW Team to mitigate increased workload.

- Flexibility of the Safety and Injury Management Advisors to be allocated to functional area requiring priority resourcing.





Option 3 – Implementation of Endorsed Recommendations:

Potential Risk if change is approved



Likelihood:Possible (3)

Risk rating:Medium (6-10)

- Ensure staffing backfill provision is built in for critical HSW functions.

- Increased resources in HSW Team to mitigate increased workload.

- Flexibility of the Safety and Injury Management Advisors to be allocated to functional area requiring priority resourcing.





5. Recommendations It is recommended that Option 2 is progressed for the following reasons:

Enables a reduced premium cost in the medium to long-term. Acts to reduce injuries and injury severity in the workplace. Enhances focus on safety performance with time and resources dedicated to proactive safety activities

and education.


https://qheps.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0045/1939869/briefing-note-risk-guide.pdf

https://qheps.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0031/455188/thhscor140731.pdf

https://qheps.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0032/483674/risk-analysis-matrix.pdf

Improves flexibility of the Safety and Injury Management functions to allocate staff to the functional area requiring more resources.

Enhances management of return to work through improved stakeholder engagement with Service Group Directors and operational Line Managers.

The management of complex cases, QSuper and IMEs would be owned and controlled by the Team Leader Rehabilitation & Injury Management.

Option 3 involves movement of the WHS Systems Advisor Role to a centralised systems and reporting area within HR. This would result in enhanced collaboration and alignment of all management systems and reporting throughout the HRE Division. However, this move may require re-alignment within the HR team if adopted and as a result, this option is not recommended at this current time.

Positions affected by proposed changeDirectly affected employee/s:

Name Position Position Number Classification Employment Status

WHS Systems Advisor 30487559 A05 PFHealth & Safety Partner

30463120 A04 PF

Health & Safety Partner

30463120 A04 PP

Health & Safety Partner

30463120 A04 TF

Indirectly affected employee/s:

Name Position Position Number Classification Employment Status

Team Leader Health Safety & Rehab

30480780 A06 PF

Team Leader Wellness

30480783 HP4 PP

Hazardous Manual Task Coordinator

30483710 HP4 PF

Health & Wellness Coordinator

30463608 HP4 PF

6. Next StepsThe following steps will be followed:

Date Activity Responsible Officer

21.03.19 Tabled out of session with Together Queensland Union regarding intent to consult with staff. Agreement reached with organiser.

Stephen Gray

08.04.19 Present Business Case to HSW Staff for Change Stephen Gray08.04.19 Provide Business Case to Together Queensland Union Stephen Gray08.04.19 Consultation period for feedback on Business Case opens HSW Staff29.04.19 Consultation period for feedback on Business Case closes HSW Staff29.04.19 Feedback on the proposed change will be considered by Director of

HSW DepartmentStephen Gray

13.05.19 Expected proposed implementation plan provided to HSW staff Stephen Gray13.05.19 Consultation period on proposed implementation plan opens HSW Staff27.05.19 Consultation period on proposed implementation plan closes HSW Staff03.06.19 Implementation Plan finalised Stephen Gray30.06.19 Initiate implementation plan HSW Staff

For both Options 2 and 3, the following is proposed:


With the separation of safety and injury management functions, it will be necessary to assign the current safety partners into one of the two functional streams with a direct reporting line to the respective team leader (2 FTE to Health & Safety and 4 FTE to Rehabilitation & Injury Management). The single role description incorporates both safety and injury management functions to allow flexibility and sustainable change to adapt to the business needs into the future. It is proposed that initially the current safety partners will be asked if they have a preference to one function or the other. If we get the required numbers for each function, no further process is required. If a greater number of staff wish to move into a function than the spots available, an EOI/merit process will be utilised.

It is anticipated that one Injury Management functional role will be filled by the current Rural Hospital Safety Partner who will continue to focus on both safety and injury management. This role will report operationally to the Team Leader of Rehabilitation & Injury Management with a dotted line to the Team Leader Health & Safety.

The number of staff allocated to each function will be reviewed annually to ensure resourcing remains appropriate.

Recommendation (b) outlines the need for an additional resource for 3 months to assist with the job dictionary. This may need to be considered for a longer period to ensure completion of this task. A minimum of 12 months would achieve the recommendation suggested as this body of work aligns to several components of the HSW function.

Consideration for staff to transfer between the two functions will be given on an annual basis or earlier as vacancies may occur.

The OVP NG staff are being reassigned to Nursing Education & Research following a separate review. The OVP Administration Officer role is likely to remain within our department, dependant on the outcome of the Business Case presented by Clinical, which is shown in the attached Organisational Structures for both Options 2 and 3.

To assist with the increase workload on the Wellness Team, it is recommended to increase the Team Leader of Wellness from 0.74 FTE to 1.0 FTE on a permanent basis.

To assist with the high administrative burden resulting from the high QSuper caseload, it is recommended that an additional AO role be considered as part of the resource review.

Initiation of implementation of the proposed structure by 16.05.19.

7. Supporting Employees through ChangeThe Townsville HHS value and respect our staff and the contribution they make in the delivery of health services. We appreciate this may be a difficult time for affected employees and offer the following support activities to support staff:

Encourage access to the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) on 1800 604 640. This confidential service can be accessed through self-referral to LifeWorks (Optum), the external EAP service provider. Services are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and 365 days a year, at no cost. Counselling services are available face to face or by telephone. Additional information is available at: http://qheps.health.qld.gov.au/eap;

Line manager support; Team-based support; and Together Queensland Union

Norm JacobsenRegional Organiser (Northern)Together Queensland [email protected]: 0408 309 954

8. Feedback ContactsStakeholders are invited to provide feedback by 29.04.2019 regarding the business case (refer to Attachment 5). Feedback may be provided to the following officers by email, phone or face to face:


mailto:[email protected]

http://qheps.health.qld.gov.au/eap

Stephen GrayDirector HSWHSW [email protected]: 4433 1714 / 0429 908 000

Laura CamilleriTeam Leader Health & SafetyHSW [email protected]: 4433 1732 / 0427 822 098

Norm JacobsenRegional Organiser (Northern)Together Queensland [email protected]: 0408 309 954

9. AttachmentThe following attachments are included for consideration at the business case stage:

1. Current organisational structure

2. Proposed organisational structure for Option 2

3. Proposed organisational structure for Option 3

4. Draft Role Descriptions for the following positions:





5. Feedback template





10. Proposal ApprovalAccountability Name and Position Approval Signature and

Date

Prepared by:Stephen GrayDirector Health Safety WellnessHuman Resources and EngagementTownsville Hospital and Health Service

Yes No

Reviewed and assessed against applicable industrial instruments by:

___________________________Allan ParsonsDirector HREHuman Resources and EngagementTownsville Hospital and Health Service

Yes No

Reviewed for financial implications by:

_____________________Rod MargettsInterim CFOFinance Service GroupTownsville Hospital and Health Service

Yes No

Reviewed for professional impact by: [if required]

___________________________NameExecutive Director (clinical lead)Townsville Hospital and Health Service

Yes No

N/A

Endorsed in line with planned THHS directions:

___________________________Stephen EatonChief Operating Officer Townsville Hospital and Health Service

Yes No

Endorsed from an industrial perspective:

___________________________Sam GalluccioExecutive Director Human Resources and EngagementTownsville Hospital and Health Service

Yes No

Approval for commencement of consultation and tabling at relevant LCF or at HSCF:

___________________________Kieran KeyesHealth Service Chief Executive Townsville Hospital and Health Service

Yes No


Attachment 1 – Current HSW Department Organisational Structure


Attachment 2 – Proposed HSW Department Organisational Structure for Option 2 (Recommended)


Attachment 3 – Proposed HSW Department Organisational Structure for Option 3


Attachment 4 – Draft Role Descriptions for the following positions:






Attachment 5 – Feedback template

1. Name:

2. Position:

3. Comments on proposed change:

4. Please indicate aspects of the proposal you think will work well:

5. Please describe improvements that could be made on the proposal:

6. Other feedback regarding the proposal:


1a - business case for significant change | townsville hhs ... · web viewbusiness case for...

Documents