The Fair Entitlements Guarantee Program functions effectively

Table 12. Targets and results — Fair Entitlements Guarantee

Analysis: Fair Entitlements Guarantee

The department met or exceeded all of its key performance targets for the Fair Entitlements Guarantee in 2018–19.

Calculations of results for the two timeliness indicators use data from the Fair Entitlements Guarantee claims assessment database. The department continuously collects this data in administering the Fair Entitlements Guarantee.

The department assessed claims at an average of 8.0 weeks, improving on the 8.3 week result of 2017–18 in a period when the number of claims increased by 13 per cent. The department finalised 91.9 per cent of claims within 16 weeks, compared to 91.6 per cent in 2017–18.

The department measures the accuracy of claim decisions through a monthly internal audit of a statistically significant random sample of claim decisions. The result is the proportion of decisions found to be accurate against the sample tested. This year, 97.3 per cent were accurate against a target of 95 per cent. This compares to 96.9 per cent in 2017–18.

Results for stakeholder satisfaction are from electronic surveys of stakeholders. The department surveys claimants six weeks after they receive an outcome on their claim, and insolvency practitioners who have been involved with the Fair Entitlements Guarantee annually towards the end of the financial year. The measure is the percentage of respondents who indicate they are ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’ with the Fair Entitlements Guarantee, excluding nil responses. Claimant satisfaction was 85.8 per cent, compared to 86.2 per cent in 2017–18. Claimant satisfaction is highly correlated with claimant outcomes: 98 per cent of people who received what they expected were satisfied, whereas only 14 per cent of people who did not receive a payment stated they were satisfied. Ninety-six per cent of insolvency practitioners were satisfied with the department’s administration of the Fair Entitlements Guarantee; this compares to 91.1 per cent in 2017–18.

Commonwealth-funded projects are undertaken by builders accredited

Table 13. Targets and results — Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner

Analysis: Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner

The Office of the Federal Safety Commissioner (OFSC) works closely with industry to encourage companies to seek and maintain accreditation. This collaborative approach provides companies with the best opportunity to meet the required high standards and ensures the greatest impact in improving workplace health and safety across sections of the construction industry.

In 2018–19, the OFSC continued to streamline the reporting requirements for the Work Health and Safety Accreditation Scheme. The scheme’s biannual activity report and its project report have been combined into a scheme biannual report. Online application continued to expedite the assessment process: 99 per cent of applications were assessed within 10 working days, which is above the 90 per cent target.

In 2017, all accreditation scheme reporting through the OFSC’s online system become mandatory, significantly improving the timeliness of incident reporting. In the 2018 calendar year, an average of 47 per cent of incident reports were submitted on time, compared to an average of 33 per cent in the 2017 calendar year.

In addition to providing work health and safety reports, accredited companies are subject to regular compliance audits. Information gathered through these processes allows the Federal Safety Commissioner to monitor the companies’ performance and the scheme’s effectiveness. At 30 June 2019, 476 companies were accredited under the scheme. These companies are currently undertaking Commonwealth-funded construction work valued at $51.6 billion.

The OFSC operates under the Australian Government’s Regulator Performance Framework. Self-assessment against the framework’s six key performance indicators is undertaken annually and reported at fsc.gov.au.

The workplace relations system contributes to the productivity agenda by encouraging the adoption of flexible and modern workplace relations

Table 14. Targets and results — workplace relations system

Analysis: workplace relations

Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) shows that labour productivity — as measured by gross value added per hour worked in the market sector — decreased by 0.8 per cent (in trend terms) over the year to the June quarter of 2019, compared to an increase of 0.4 per cent growth over the year to the June quarter of 2018. Short-term measures of productivity are prone to volatility and cyclical effects and should therefore be interpreted with caution.

The ABS Wage Price Index measures wage growth in the Australian economy and is the preferred indicator of wage trends. The index increased by 2.3 per cent (seasonally adjusted) over the year to the June quarter of 2019, compared to 2.1 per cent over the year to the June quarter of 2018.

ABS data shows that the rate of industrial disputation was 9.8 working days per 1,000 employees over the year to the June quarter of 2019, compared to 9.9 working days lost per 1,000 employees over the year to the June quarter of 2018. The rate of industrial disputes remains at near historical lows.

The department maintains a workplace agreement database that contains information on all known federal enterprise agreements in operation since the introduction of the Enterprise Bargaining Principle in October 1991. Analysis of the database indicates there were 10,572 current agreements (not expired or terminated) at March 2019*, covering 2.09 million employees. This compares with 12,831 agreements covering 1.96 million employees at 30 June 2018. Note that there were some minor revisions in the historical figures.

*Full year data will not be available until after the date of printing this annual report.

Increased access by small businesses to advisory services that support and enhance their digital capabilities

Table 15. Target and result — Australian Small Business Advisory Services

Analysis: Australian Small Business Advisory Services

AusIndustry’s Business Grants Hub (in the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science) administers ASBAS on behalf of the department. Accordingly, the Business Grants Hub is responsible for ensuring providers meet the terms of their agreements and report on time.

ASBAS providers regularly report on their delivery of digital advisory services, including:

• how many small businesses accessed advisory services and which types of services they received
• how the services were provided — for example, through:

– direct one-on-one advisory support delivered in person, remotely online or over the phone

– interactive webinars

– face-to-face workshops

• satisfaction levels of the small businesses receiving the services.

To assess the effectiveness of the program, an impact evaluation will commence in the 2019–20 financial year.