Remuneration of all Australia Post Employees

William Shakespeare made this Freedom of Information request to Australian Postal Corporation

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was partially successful.

William Shakespeare

Dear Australian Postal Corporation,

This is a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act.

I seek the latest document which details the salary ranges of all Australia Post employees, and the number of employees at each salary range.

Yours faithfully,

William Shakespeare

foi, Australian Postal Corporation

1 Attachment

Good morning Mr Shakespeare,

Find attached Australia Post's acknowledgement of your request.

Regards,

Anna Oliver
FOI Officer
Australia Post
[email address]

-----Original Message-----
From: William Shakespeare [mailto:[FOI #3032 email]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2017 8:42 PM
To: foi <[Australia Post request email]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - Remuneration of all Australia Post Employees

Dear Australian Postal Corporation,

This is a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act.

I seek the latest document which details the salary ranges of all Australia Post employees, and the number of employees at each salary range.

Yours faithfully,

William Shakespeare

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #3032 email]

Is [Australia Post request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information requests to Australian Postal Corporation? If so, please contact us using this form:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/change_re...

This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Australia Post is committed to providing our customers with excellent service. If we can assist you in any way please telephone 13 13 18 or visit our website.

The information contained in this email communication may be proprietary, confidential or legally professionally privileged. It is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. You should only read, disclose, re-transmit, copy, distribute, act in reliance on or commercialise the information if you are authorised to do so. Australia Post does not represent, warrant or guarantee that the integrity of this email communication has been maintained nor that the communication is free of errors, virus or interference.

If you are not the addressee or intended recipient please notify us by replying direct to the sender and then destroy any electronic or paper copy of this message. Any views expressed in this email communication are taken to be those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically attributes those views to Australia Post and is authorised to do so.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

hide quoted sections

foi, Australian Postal Corporation

2 Attachments

Good afternoon Mr Shakespeare,

I refer to your Freedom of Information request received by Australia Post on 7/2/2017.

Find attached my decision.

Regards,

Anna Oliver
FOI Officer
Australia Post
[Australia Post request email]

-----Original Message-----
From: William Shakespeare [mailto:[FOI #3032 email]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2017 8:42 PM
To: foi <[Australia Post request email]>
Subject: Freedom of Information request - Remuneration of all Australia Post Employees

Dear Australian Postal Corporation,

This is a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act.

I seek the latest document which details the salary ranges of all Australia Post employees, and the number of employees at each salary range.

Yours faithfully,

William Shakespeare

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #3032 email]

Is [Australia Post request email] the wrong address for Freedom of Information requests to Australian Postal Corporation? If so, please contact us using this form:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/change_re...

This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...

If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Australia Post is committed to providing our customers with excellent service. If we can assist you in any way please telephone 13 13 18 or visit our website.

The information contained in this email communication may be proprietary, confidential or legally professionally privileged. It is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. You should only read, disclose, re-transmit, copy, distribute, act in reliance on or commercialise the information if you are authorised to do so. Australia Post does not represent, warrant or guarantee that the integrity of this email communication has been maintained nor that the communication is free of errors, virus or interference.

If you are not the addressee or intended recipient please notify us by replying direct to the sender and then destroy any electronic or paper copy of this message. Any views expressed in this email communication are taken to be those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically attributes those views to Australia Post and is authorised to do so.

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

hide quoted sections

Ben Fairless left an annotation ()

The decision here is fundamentally flawed. If the FOI Officer is able to provide the information she has provided, then the information must exist!

Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act covers a request involving the use of computers. It says that:
- If a request is made for information and the information isn't available in a discreet form in written forms by the agency and
- The person does not want the data on computer disk or tape and
- The agency can convert the data into written form by using a computer then
- the request should be considered as for that document (that is, the agency can be forced to create a document).

As the agency has done this "administratively", this appears to be a deliberate attempt to subvert your review rights. You still retain a right of review if you aren't happy with the information you're provided, as the decision was technically refused.

Locutus Sum left an annotation ()

As Mr Fairless shows, it is a fascinating mix up but I am not so sure that it is malice that motivates the strange answer. In fact, all the information, swallowed in small mouthfuls, is correct even if the basis for the decision is wrong (and reviewable). So I think that most of the problem is a very poorly explained letter ... but without drops of malice and subversion.

To start, however, we must sort out the mess of information about "administratively", "no appeal rights" etc.

The officer says that she has searched, but can find "no single document identifying salary ranges for Australia Post employees, and the number of Australia Post employees within each salary range". This is probably correct, so the officer (who appears not to understand the relevance of s 17 of the Act) says that no relevant document exists, and she refuses the request on the basis of s 24A(1)(b)(ii). That is the correct basis for refusing to disclose documents that do not exist, but as Mr Fairless has explained, the request should have been treated as if the document did exist (s 17) because it can be constructed using the normal computer facilities that Australia Post uses every day. After the officer refuses the request, she correctly explains that the decision can be reviewed either by an internal reviewer or by the Information Commissioner. I say "correctly explains" because a refusal on the grounds of s 24A(1)(b)(ii) is an "access refusal decision", and an access refusal decision is reviewable.

It is after this that part that the letter gets confusing. The officer cannot find the single document that she thinks is required to satisfy the FOI request but she tries to help by giving a lot of extra useful information, including the number of employees who have different job titles. She also explains how this information can be linked (by the applicant) to information at the Fair Work Commission to discover information about salaries. She then says that because she is releasing this information administratively, the applicant does not have review rights about the information she has released. By the letter of the law, it is true to say that the administrative release of information is not reviewable but it is completely irrelevant. The applicant is not going to appeal against what was released! He is going to appeal about what was not released.

The request for review can say something this way:

Dear Australia Post,

I request an internal review of your decision (2017-03-07) to refuse to give me access to "the latest document which details the salary ranges of all Australia Post
employees, and the number of employees at each salary range". You refused my request on the basis of s 24A(1)(b)(ii).

I think you forgot to take into mind the requirements of s 17 of the Act. The effect of the section is that it requires you to behave as my document does exist if it is possible for you to construct it using the information that you store in your computers. I think that you must have the information about the salary range (employment band) of every person that works for you and that you could construct a document with the information that I would like. Please construct the relevant document and release it to me.

Yours faithfully
William Shakespeare

Locutus Sum left an annotation ()

I said in my last annotation that I though that the letter from the officer was "a very poorly explained letter ... but without drops of malice and subversion." I made an argument.

Now, today, I have seen another reponse (https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/r... ) from the same officer at Australia Post. This time, the letter is much clearer and I think it is obvious that the officer is explaining to (a different) applicant that she has refused his FOI request and that the refusal is reviewable, but she has also provided some useful information outside of the framework of the FOI Act and that provision is not reviewable.

Note to Australia Post: A good and useful improvement in the clarity of your answers. Thank you.