I would like to submit the below considerations to the review anonymously. I don’t mind the submission being made public, just not my details or the Department I work for. I have run out of time and am not in a position to make use of coverlens.com.

• The hierarchy and classifications within the APS are not able to be viewed in abstraction from the broader context of change. Many of the functions traditionally undertaken by APS employees have been outsourced, which is a major element of the disappearance of lower-level classification roles. This needs to be factored into the review as APS5 and APS6 roles are high level roles which shouldn’t be re-baselined purely because there no APS1s or APS2s and decreasing numbers of APS3 and APS4.
• Marrying recruitment with promotion is a model that has proven not to achieve its purported benefits. Competition theory is not well applied and the result is that many people are promoted to incompetence. One low-hanging fruit in this regard is broad-banding. Broad-banding of roles should be the norm in the public service, not the exception. The review should recommend Departments and Agencies broad-band APS1-4 roles, APS5-6 and EL1-2.
• The Hierarchy Review should re-evaluate the SES as a concept. In particular, the employment of SES as a distinct set of employees with distinct employment provisions and separate remuneration reviews is inconsistent with the lack of distinction in the actual roles performed. SES should be APS employees under the same terms and conditions as other public servants.
• Labour Hire contracts should be made to nominate the APS level of each contractor and should be limited to a maximum time that a contractor can fill an APS role before it must be permanently filled by an APS employee.
• ‘Acting’ at higher levels should be more prescribed in the PS Act. Temporary acting should not be without appropriate remuneration and remuneration should be increased further where the workload includes both roles (i.e. where there is no back-filling) e.g. 1.5 times the higher rate.

I would like to have been more comprehensive, but 31 days is not a long time when you are stretched at work and home both.