Queensland ambulance employees are public servants, and their employment is governed by, amongst other things, the Public Sector Act 2022 (Qld).  That Act provides that where an employee has been engaged on a casual or a series of short-term temporary contracts for 12 months may apply to have their employment converted to permanent ongoing employment (Public Sector Act 2022 (Qld) s 112).  If the employee has been employed for 2 years, the Chief Executive must consider, without the need for the employee’s application, whether to continue their employment or offer them permanent employment (s 115).

A critical test is that the decision to convert a person to permanent employment can only be made if ‘there is a continuing need for someone to be employed in the employee’s role, or a role that is substantially the same as the employee’s role’ (s 114(3)(a)(i); emphasis added).

Bryce Raymond is a QAS Advanced Care Paramedic who has been employed ‘on a non-permanent basis in the Sunshine Coast and Wide Bay Region … since 22 February 2022…’  He wrote to QAS advising that his employment was eligible for review under s 115.  There was some dispute as to whether he had had two years continuous service but ultimately QAS did conduct the review.  They determined that Mr Raymond meet all the requirements for employment as a QAS Advanced Care paramedic.  He was offered ongoing, permanent employment but in areas well away from where he currently worked ie in Mt Isa (1865km), Warwick (259km) or Goondiwindi (454km; distances taken from Google Maps).  There was also a possibility of positions in Metro North and South but the availability of positions in those areas was still be considered.

Mr Raymon appealed to the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission arguing that the decision not to offer him ongoing employment on the Sunshine Coast was a refusal to offer the conversion required by s 115.  There is a right to appeal against a ‘conversion decision’ provided in s 131.  A ‘conversion decision’ is a decision ‘under section 115 not to convert the employment of a public sector employee mentioned in section 112 to a permanent basis’ (s 129; emphasis added).

In Raymond v State of Queensland (Queensland Ambulance Service) [2025] QIRC 025 the ambulance service argued (at [17]) that the Commission did not have jurisdiction as there had been no ‘conversion decision’ as defined in s 129, that is QAS had offered to convert Mr Raymond’s employment to ongoing, just not on the Sunshine Coast.   The appellant, Mr Raymond, argued that they had refused to convert his employment on the Sunshine Coast to ongoing employment and therefore this was a relevant refusal ([18]-[19]).

Critically the Public Sector Act required the Chief Executive to offer ongoing employment to a person who otherwise met the requirements for appointment if ‘there is a continuing need for someone to be employed in the employee’s role, or a role that is substantially the same as the employee’s role’ (s 114(3)(a)(i); emphasis added).  The question was whether the offered positions in Mt Isa, Warwick or Goondiwindi were ‘substantially the same’ as his position on the Sunshine Coast. The Commission held that they were. At [39] Industrial Commissioner McLennan (‘McLennan IC’) said:

The Respondent is not required to consider conversion into the specific position that the Appellant is employed in, or the specific location of the position. The requirement is for the Respondent to consider whether there is a continuing need for someone to be employed in the employee’s role, or a role that is substantially the same as the employee’s role. The Respondent has done that in my view.

At [45] McLennan IC adopted the reasoning of Pidgeon IC who said (in the case Ewart v State of Queensland (Queensland Ambulance Service) [2023] QIRC 304 (20 October 2023)):

It seems to me that Advanced Care Paramedics undertake the same role and duties in various contexts across the state. I accept the submission of QAS that the industrial instruments, base pay, conditions and entitlements applicable to Advanced Care Paramedic roles are the same across locations. All roles within the public sector are subject to state-wide transfer and employment procedures and to that extent, matters such as location and travel will differ across locations but I do not think they serve to make the role substantially different. A state-wide context may also mean that workloads, rosters, cultural or socio-economic complexities, location-specific challenges and the like will vary, however the nature of the work and the duties to be undertaken will be that expected of an Advanced Care Paramedic in the context in which they are employed. It may be that in some regional locations, the travel required to get to and from work will considerably vary greater than or less than others. It may also be that there is cost involved with relocating to a position, however this is a feature of a state-wide system. Opportunities for career advancement or to undertake higher duties positions may also differ from place to place but I do not find that such differences serve to make the role substantially different.

QAS has given reasons why they could not offer a permanent position on the Sunshine Coast. They said (at [35]) that his employment had been for the purposes of:

  • filling a temporary/short-term vacancy arising from an absence;
  • performing work necessary to meet an unexpected short-term increase in workload;
  • filling gaps in work rosters and other short-term increases in workload where work patterns and demand are both variable and difficult to predict; and/or
  • filing (sic) a position for which work hours are irregular, informal, flexible, occasional or non-rostered.

The respondent argued (at [37]) that the fact there was no budgeted vacancy that is a vacancy in the agreed establishment for his station or area, was not sufficient ground not to convert him to permanent employment in that area.  In support of this argument, he referred to a previous decision by McLennan IC (Keenan v State of Queensland (Queensland Health) [2023] QIRC 297 (16 October 2023)) where she said:

A budgeted vacancy is not required for conversion to permanent employment. Creation of a new permanent position is to be expected in such circumstances. There is no indication that the difficulties faced by the Department in this instance would be any different than those posed to most agencies converting employees.

McLennan IC distinguished that case on the basis that in Keenan’s case there had been no offer of ongoing employment but in Raymond’s case (at [44]) ‘The Respondent has appropriately considered and offered the Appellant permanent employment in the role of Advanced Care Paramedic, at various locations across the State.’

That is the absence of a ‘budged vacancy’ is no reason not to offer ongoing employment but if there is a vacancy in a position that is ‘substantially similar’ that can be offered regardless of where it is in the state of Queensland.

Discussion

This may offer public sector agencies a way to avoid the clear intention of the Act. That is an agency may want the flexibility of keeping people on casual or short-term appointments.  The Act intends that if there is evidence that their position is ongoing, they should be employed on an ongoing basis.  An agency can avoid that by offering ongoing employment but at remote location knowing that if an employee is tied to an area by social ties, eg their partner’s employment, schooling needs of children, other caring responsibilities or other social connections, they will not accept the appointment but continue on as a casual or temporary employee.

If there was sufficient work filling in for paramedics on leave, coping with extra workload etc it’s hard to see why a person could not be offered permanent employment even if it was for variable hours and at different stations within the region.  Having a permanent ‘floater’ position would surely be a way to meet those variable needs? (And see the proposals made, and the discussion on the merits of those proposals in Application for flexible work arrangements – Ambulance Victoria (February 23, 2023) and Ambulance Victoria appeal against flexible work application dismissed (June 17, 2023)).

It is not, however, the role of this blog to tell QAS how to run their business and there maybe issues of industrial complexity that I don’t understand if they were to offer a person a permanent job even it did not involve regular, consistent hours and/or required them to work at different stations. The role of this blog is to report on the law and how that law has been interpreted and applied by relevant tribunals.

Conclusion

McLennan IC found that QAS had considered the matters it was required to consider under the Public Sector Act. Having determined that Mr Raymond meet all the standards necessary for appointment, QAS offered to convert his employment to a permanent position. The offer of work in areas well outside his current work location was offering him work that, if not the same was ‘substantially the same’ as his current position. As a result, there had not been a decision ‘not to convert’ his employment and there was, therefore no right to appeal and no grounds for the Commission to review the decision not to offer ongoing employment on the Sunshine Coast.

This blog is made possible with generous financial support from (in alphabetical order) the Australasian College of Paramedicine, the Australian Paramedics Association (NSW), the Australian Paramedics Association (Qld), Natural Hazards Research Australia, NSW Rural Fire Service Association and the NSW SES Volunteers Association. I am responsible for the content in this post including any errors or omissions. Any opinions expressed are mine, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or understanding of the donors.

This blog is a general discussion of legal principles only.  It is not legal advice. Do not rely on the information here to make decisions regarding your legal position or to make decisions that affect your legal rights or responsibilities. For advice on your particular circumstances always consult an admitted legal practitioner in your state or territory.