Today’s correspondent says ‘I’ve just seen your recent post regarding the meal directions occurring in QAS and really value the opinion on it’.  I assume the post they are referring to is Carrying meals in an ambulance (October 17, 2022). They continue:

I have a further question which I’ve wondered regarding the meal process which I haven’t been able to get a clear understanding on, if you would consider commenting on it?

Part of the meal process which has been developed includes the ability to split a crew up in order to facilitate a 30 min break from duty (a ‘meal break’ at a pre-agreed suitable break location in line with EB and WHS standards).

What could occur during this process, is one paramedic is to remain with the ramped patient, while the other leaves the ramp area to have their break. In periods of extended ramping, those officers should be able to swap and facilitate the second officer having their break. Some of these previously agreed locations are approximately a 10min walk from the Ambulance Bay.

It is possible that during the time an officer is away having their break, that the ramped patient is offloaded and the paramedic with the patient ‘makes ready’ the ambulance to respond again. It is expected that once the ambulance is ready, the paramedic marks it available for dispatch again, before completing paperwork etc. The other officer is expected to continue their break but wouldn’t be aware that their vehicle is now able to be dispatched.

If this crew is dispatched on a 1A ‘highest priority case’ such as a CPR in progress case, what would be the reasonable course of action for the paramedic with the vehicle to take while waiting for the second officer to return from the agreed break location? Is it reasonable that they wait for up to 10min while that officer returns to the ambulance, or would that be seen as failing to respond (which QAS has referred to external bodies such as CCC for corrupt conduct or OHO for misconduct previously, resulting in lengthy stand downs for investigations)? If that officer asked a supervisor, should they respond or wait for their second officer, and the supervisor directs them to wait, does that place the supervisor in breach instead?

It is my opinion that the officer in the vehicle should respond immediately as a single officer, or that a supervisor will give that same direction.

I think the only answer the law has here is that an employee is obliged to obey the lawful and reasonable directions of their employer (see Paramedic’s use of AI for clinical practice (November 15, 2024).  The employer communicates those directions through policy and directions from authorised staff, relevantly the dispatchers and where necessary line managers/supervisors.

QAS should have in place a policy addressing this issue and if there isn’t such a policy then the industrial union should raise it. 

The dispatcher is responsible for allocating tasks and if they know the officer is on his or her own and dispatches them in effect as a single officer, then they should go if working ‘one-up’ is part of their duties.   If only some officers are trained or endorsed to operate ‘one up’ then an officer who is not so endorsed should not mark themselves as available to respond and should advise the dispatcher of their limitations.  Hopefully the dispatchers know each crew members level of qualification.

If a supervisor directs an officer to wait for their buddy to return, then the employee should follow that direction but should obviously inform the dispatcher so they can decide what alternative arrangements to make.

One would infer however that if the single officer is expected to advise that they are available then the expectation is that they are available to respond and by inference that must mean available to respond as a single officer.

Conclusion

The answer here is pure speculation.  It depends entirely on what the QAS policy is.  It is the employee’s duty to comply with those directions.  One would infer that if the officer not on their break is expected to mark themselves (or their ambulance) ‘available for dispatch’ then they are available and if that means available as a single officer so be it.  If they are not meant to respond as a single officer then they are not, and should be marked as, available for dispatch until the crew is back together.

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.