Dear Fire and Emergency New Zealand,

Please supply the following information regarding the recent restructure of FENZ:

How many appointees to the position of Group Manager:

1. did not meet the requirements of the Confirmation of Relevant Experience (CORE) interim assessment?

2. have not recently (for example in the 12 mths preceding 1 June 2021) been on a Senior Officer response roster?

3. do not have relevant leadership experience at an incident involving a high level of complexity?

4. have a leadership tertiary qualification

5. have a management tertiary qualification, or relevant experience (such as managing staff along with responsibilities and accountabilities for budget, property, fleet and plant).

Additionally,
6. the number of 'affected' applicants for the 'new' Canterbury district Group Manager positions who were band 18 or higher?

7. a copy of the analysis carried out by any person/organisation, and/or consultants working on behalf of FENZ, which compared the Group Manager position to those of Area Managers and PRFOs.

8. on what date(s) were the Canterbury Group Manager and Community Risk Manager interviews held for 'affected' employees?

9. on what date(s) were the interview outcomes for the above assessed and scored?

Yours faithfully,

A Boocock

Dear Official Information Requests,

Thank you for your response to the OIA request regarding "Restructure - Redeployment/Reassignment Data".

It would seem that the response to Qn 7 (copied in below) is incomplete. A common theme communicated by RMs to 'affected' GM applicants who were unsuccessful in the first round, was that the unsuccessful applicant could not reapply along with 'affected' people in the second round of GM appointments. For this to have been so commonly conveyed by RMs throughout NZ, there must have been some form of communication prior to 23 April 2021, to, from or between RMs and/or senior management - verbal, written or other - which conveyed or discussed this. Please provide this communication or records.

7. Please supply any correspondence from SDLT or the ELT which provided guidance or clarity around whether or not 'affected' staff who were unsuccessful during the first round of GM appointments, could reapply along with 'impacted' and others during the second round of GM appointments.
There was no specific guidance from Service Delivery Leadership Team or Executive Leadership Team on this matter. This aspect of your request is therefore refused under sections 18(g) and 18(e) of the OIA, in that it is not held by Fire and Emergency and the document alleged to contain the information does not exist.

Additionally, please supply the advertisement posted for Group Manager positions in Hawkes Bay and Taranaki which stated that anyone who had previously applied for a GM position in any region was ineligible to apply for those positions.
Please provide the rationale for this.
Please provide any communication between FENZ and the NZPFU regarding this matter.

Yours sincerely,

A Boocock

Dear Official Information Requests,
Further to the response received, this question has not been answered:
1. The ETP (Final, Jan 2020, para 47, p. 10) states that "... the organisation will clearly set out
who will be able to apply and be considered for these [new and vacant] positions, and in what
order". Please provide the document (and the reference within) which outlines who could apply
for the Group Manager positions and in what order, as well as the order of preference for
redeployment.

Response from FENZ:
"Please find enclosed the relevant communications that were sent to personnel.
The order for consideration of applications for the new tranche 2 positions was:
• Round 1: Affected employees only.
• Subsequent rounds: Any other applicants (with any remaining affected employees who
were held to be suitable for the position being afforded preference)."

The communications attached as part of the OIA response did not include the advertisement of, or otherwise any notification of, the GM vacancies in relation to the first round of appointments.
Please supply the document (restructure proposal document or any other), or any other communication to staff that indicates who could apply for the GM role in the first round of appointments. Please include the job advertisements for both round 1 and 2 of GM appointments as they appeared on the Portal or in any other format/media.

Yours sincerely,

A Boocock

Dear Official Information Requests,

Thank you for your letter advising an extension of time to 28 January 2022. This extension of over 6 weeks duration is very disappointing as the OIA request was relatively simple.

You may like to revisit this decision as the information requested should be readily available, and not such that extensive consultation is required.

The templated response of "The reason for the extension is because the consultations necessary to make a decision on your request are such that a proper response to your request cannot reasonably be made within the original time limit" carries little weight as it is so frequently used to justify delays.

Please provide the information requested without undue delay. I note that Chief Ombudsman Peter Boshier has stated (2020, https://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/news...) that ‘consultation is permitted and even good practice under the OIA, but it needs to be done in a way that enables agencies to comply with their statutory timeframe requirements’. Any undue delay could be seen to be contrary to law and deemed to be a refusal (OIA 28(5)), particularly for a relatively straightforward request such as this.

Yours sincerely,

A Boocock

Dear Official Information Requests,

Thank you for your reply to my OIA request, your ref: OIA 2021 6511.

I refer to your response to Request 1 below:

Fire and Emergency’s response
The Tranche 2 project team managed the recruitment process for the Group Manager positions that you are referring to. No decision was made outside of the project team to exclude those who had previously applied for positions from the recruitment round. Once this inclusion in the job advert was brought to the attention of Senior Managers the job advert was changed and the deadline for applications was extended to allow time for those who had previously applied to reapply. On this basis your request is declined under sections 18(g) and 18(e) of the OIA, in that it is not held by Fire and Emergency and the document alleged to contain the information does not exist.

- please supply a copy of the changed Group Manager advertisement following the removal of the statement which excluded those who had previously applied from reapplying, including the exact date at which this changed advertisement was made visible on the portal. I am referring to the GM advertisements for the second round of redeployment-first round of recruitment, initially advertised around 23 April 2021.
- it is apparent from your response that there was some communication within FENZ around this issue once it was drawn to the attention of senior managers. Please supply copies of this correspondence.

Yours sincerely,

A Boocock

Dear Official Information Requests,

Please confirm that you have received my request for additional information submitted 10 Jan 2022:
Thank you for your reply to my OIA request, your ref: OIA 2021 6511.

I refer to your response to Request 1 below:

Fire and Emergency’s response
The Tranche 2 project team managed the recruitment process for the Group Manager positions that you are referring to. No decision was made outside of the project team to exclude those who had previously applied for positions from the recruitment round. Once this inclusion in the job advert was brought to the attention of Senior Managers the job advert was changed and the deadline for applications was extended to allow time for those who had previously applied to reapply. On this basis your request is declined under sections 18(g) and 18(e) of the OIA, in that it is not held by Fire and Emergency and the document alleged to contain the information does not exist.

- please supply a copy of the changed Group Manager advertisement following the removal of the statement which excluded those who had previously applied from reapplying, including the exact date at which this changed advertisement was made visible on the portal. I am referring to the GM advertisements for the second round of redeployment-first round of recruitment, initially advertised around 23 April 2021 and supposedly replaced with an amended advertisement.
- it is apparent from your response that there was some communication within FENZ around this issue of the incorrect statement once it was drawn to the attention of senior managers. Please supply copies of any correspondence relating to this.

Yours sincerely,

A Boocock

Dear Official Information Requests,

Thank you for your Response Letter (ref: OIA 2022 6908).

Again, this has raised more questions than it has answered.

I draw your attention to the email from Kerry Gregory to 'Whole Country' Fri 30 April, 6.41pm, where he confirms that "Last Friday we opened applications for the residual Group Manager (GM) and Community Risk Manager (CRM) roles throughout the country. With a week to go before applications close, I want to provide some clarity around a couple of frequently asked questions we’ve been receiving about the roles. I also want to encourage each and every one of you who have the suitable skills and experience (as outlined below) and are interested in a role to get your application in. Applications for the GM position are open to everyone in Fire and Emergency, and the CRM roles are also open to external candidates".

Yet, you state in your reply of 14 Feb 2022 that: "Once a person had been deemed ineligible for redeployment, they were not able to reapply through redeployment processes for the same position".

Your statement contradicts Kerry Gregory's email; an email to ALL STAFF which clearly indicates that everyone in FENZ was eligible to apply in this second round of GM redeployment/first round of recruitment in the period April - June 2021.

Please explain this disparity.

My concern around this disparity is further backed by the following:

1) OIA response of 11 Nov 2021:
FENZ response - "The order for consideration of applications for the new tranche 2 positions was:
• Round 1: Affected employees only.
• Subsequent rounds: Any other applicants (with any remaining affected employees who were held to be suitable for the position being afforded preference)".

It does not state in your response that anyone who had previously applied was excluded from ANY following, or specific, application rounds (principally, the second round of GM redeployment/first round of recruitment, April - June 2021).

2) OIA response of 11 Nov 2021:
My question - "5. Did any 'affected' staff who were unsuccessful in the first round of interviews for GM, then apply again during the second round of appointments?"
FENZ Response - "Some affected staff who were unsuccessful in the first round of interviews for a role did apply in later recruitment rounds, (including in relation to the Group Manager role)."

3) OIA response of 11 Nov 2021:
My question - "7. Please supply any correspondence from SDLT or the ELT which provided guidance or clarity around whether or not 'affected' staff who were unsuccessful during the first round of GM appointments, could reapply along with 'impacted' and others during the second round of GM appointments.
FENZ response - "There was no specific guidance from Service Delivery Leadership Team or Executive Leadership Team on this matter. This aspect of your request is therefore refused under sections 18(g) and 18(e) of the OIA, in that it is not held by Fire and Emergency and the document alleged to contain the information does not exist.

4) OIA response of 11 Nov 2021:
My question - "8. If 'affected' staff were excluded from re-applying, please provide the rationale behind this".
FENZ response - "They were not excluded after round 1 and some did re-apply".

The inconsistent and contradictory information throughout the FENZ OIA responses is of concern.

Please advise:
1) why there is such a disparity between:
- the GM advertisement of around 23 April 2021, excluding some staff from reapplying
- Kerry Gregory's email to the "Whole Country" sent 30 April 2021, where he provided clarity that the GM applications were open to everyone for that round.
- FENZ OIA response of 11 Nov 2021: "They were not excluded after round 1 and some did re-apply".
- FENZ OIA response of 14 Feb 2022: "Once a person had been deemed ineligible for redeployment, they were not able to reapply through redeployment processes for the same position"

2) if it is in fact correct that previously unsuccessful applicants could not reapply in the Apr - June 2021 GM application round (advertised around 23 April 2021), who made this decision? And why were they excluded?

3) if previously unsuccessful applicants were denied the opportunity to reapply in the Apr - June 2021 round of applications for the GM roles, how does this fit with the FENZ Act 2007 Sn 26 - 30?

3) please explain why some of those 'affected' staff who were previously unsuccessful at GM appointments in the first round (redeployment), did then apply in the second round (Apr - June 2021) when they were supposedly excluded?

4) which region(s) and district(s) were those 'affected' staff in qn 3 above - those who reapplied in the Apr - June 2021 GM application round, based?

I have submitted many OIA requests around the FENZ restructure, and the FENZ responses appear to obfuscate the answers I seek.

FENZ responses have been contradictory, whereas they should be straightforward.

Either Kerry Gregory was correct and all staff could apply in the Apr - June 2021 GM application round. Opening up applications to all staff as Kerry Gregory stated, would indicate this was a recruitment round and previously successful applicants could quite rightly reapply.

Or, contrary to Sn 26 - 30 of the FENZ Act 2017, a select group of staff were excluded from reapplying in this Apr - June 2021 GM application round.

Which is it?

Yours sincerely,

A Boocock

Dear Official Information Requests,

Please provide an update on when the requested information requested will be provided.

Yours sincerely,

A Boocock