AHP AHA Separate Agreement - Government makes offer - Part 2

The government has issued an offer for a new separate enterprise agreement for AHPs and AHAs. The government’s offer includes restating some conditions you already have, slashing some of your other employment conditions, and wage increases that do not address the reduction in real wages experienced by our members.

This offer is well short of what PSA members have consistently said you need in any new agreement.

While this offer only applies to AHPs and AHAs, it is important for all members to see how the government is attempting to divide the Salaried workgroup, and the reductions to conditions they are trying to get away with while doing so.

These proposals are usually only issued after government has reached in-principle agreement with unions and bargaining agents - in this case HSU, PA and bargaining agents.

The PSA has not provided any in-principle agreement to these proposals. The PSA had not been provided with these terms before yesterday and is appalled by them. We are equally appalled that other unions and bargaining agents may be satisfied with them.

The offer (download it here 25-03-27- Letter to PSA - Terms of Offer AHP.pdf ) includes:

Term

• 4 year agreement

Wages

• 3 pay increases of 3% (August 2025, August 2026, August 2027)

• 1 pay increase of 2.5% (August 2028)

• DCP AHPs - additional allowance of 4% in the first year. The allowance is then increased by the wage increase rates (3% and 2.5%) in subsequent years

• Attraction and retention allowances for the four groups in Health currently receiving them will not be included in the enterprise agreement. Discretion remains with Health to pay the allowance or not.

This is not enough to bring South Australia’s public sector wages back into competition with other states and other sectors of the workforce. The wages outcome equates to an overall 12% increase over 4 years for most AHPs, and 16.48% over 4 years for AHPs working in the Department for Child Protection.

We welcome the recognition of our members in DCP, however the increases proposed are not enough for any AHP to meet the rises in the cost of living members have endured in the past years.

Job Security

• Appendix 1Redeployment, Retraining and Redundancy “simplified”

This would be a significant reduction in your conditions. What this means is the government intends to retain the formula for a package only. All processes and protections,that is, the case management and accountability,would be gone.With Health being one of the worst offenders in applying the requirements of Appendix 1, this is a significant problem for members.

Consultation

• obligation only for "significant impacts” on employees requiring consultation.

This would be a reduction in your conditions.The PSA won consultation on any impact on any employee in the 2017 agreement. Too often management decided a change was not significant, only for it to have a large impact on employees who were left without the opportunity to have a say in the decision.

Dispute Resolution

• An express prohibition on industrial action during dispute resolution

This would be a reduction in your conditions. A ban on industrial action should not form part of an enterprise agreement.

Additional qualifications

• Allowances ranging from $714 pa to $1123 pa to be paid based on the level of qualification.
  
  

The PSA has been advocating for all employees covered by the Salaried agreement to receive an allowance for additional qualifications.
However, the amounts proposed are approximately only 20% of the rates currently paid to public sector Nurses.

Professional development allowance (AHPs only)

• An allowance of $1000 paid on a fortnightly basis in lieu of the current reimbursement scheme.
  
  

This is the same concept as the PSA has been advocating for all employees covered by the Salaried agreement who need to maintain professional qualifications.

However, the amount proposed is approximately only 40% of the rate currently paid to public sector Nurses.

Multiclassified roles

• An allowance to account for difference between nurses rate of pay where a role is multiclassified.
  
  

The PSA has been advocating for all employees covered by the Salaried agreement to receive a similar allowance, as well as associated best conditions, where a role is multiclassified.

Work Arrangements – Seven day rostering

• Employees able to be rostered over seven days on three months notice.

• Hours to be averaged over a "roster period".

• Five weeks leave will be provided to employees “required to be available to work ordinary hours across seven days”

No shift work conditions are included in the offer nor provided in draft to the PSA– i.e.there are no protections for those rostered over seven days.Having an undefined rostering period is extremely problematic for averaging hours.

Employees required to work across seven days are already entitled to five weeks annual leave, based on working a certain number of Sundays and Public Holidays in a year (SAPSEAS Clause 28).It seems unlikely that the government would provide the additional week of annual leave (5 weeks) to any employee ‘available to work over seven days’ without utilising that availability.

The PSA has been strongly advocating for six weeks leave to be provided on a monthly accrual basis for any employee working non-standard Monday to Friday hours.

On-Call

• Clarify that minimum payment for overtime while on-call is 30 minutes and can be made up from separate shorter periods of workplace.

This is a condition currently available under the salaried agreement (SAPSEAS clause 17.4.2).

Classification

• Review of classification structures

• Automatic progression from AHP1 to AHP2.The employer can claim unsatisfactory performance and prevent progression.

• Psychologists not required to do supervision to advance to AHP3.

The terms of a review of classification structures are very broad. The proposal is to ‘aim to complete the review in two years’. Given past experience with the government conducting reviews, it seems very unlikely for this to be achieved in that time frame, if at all. The review appears to only be able to offer recommendations, at which point those recommendations would be subject to further approval based on funding, or a lack thereof.

The AHP1 – AHP2 progression changes are a small change from the current peer assessment model. There are no details provided on how an agency may interfere in progression or the thresholds for grounds of unsatisfactory performance in this context.

The proposed change for Psychologists progression to AHP3 is a change in the wording of ‘must’ be required to perform supervision to ‘may’ be required to perform supervision.

Regional incentives

• Payments to AHPs who commence work in regional areas

• Only payable to new starters from the commencement of the agreement

• Only payable to an employee up to a maximum of five years

While important for attraction to vacancies in the regions, this proposal does nothing to support members already living and working in the regions. The PSA is advocating for benefits to members who live in the regions to ease the burden of additional travel and costs incurred living away from the metropolitan area, and for retention.

Permanency

• Change the Public Sector Regulations to include AHPs and AHAs employed in Health to come under section 45 (3) of the Public Sector Act 2009

This proposal only affects AHP and AHA members in Health. Members outside of Health already can be employed under this section. This section puts some firmer limits around the use of term contract employment. The reality is that Health could administratively decide to employ AHPs and AHAs ongoing at any time without the need of a change to the regulations to force them to limit term contracts. They are choosing to provide insecure employment.

Official negotiations for the government’s proposed separate enterprise agreement for AHPs and AHAs began on 14 March 2025. On Tuesday 18 March 2025, the PSA met with government negotiators to outline the PSA’s position and the matters of importance for our members (read about that meeting in part 1 here).

PSA Organisers are continuing their regular visits to worksites to speak with members about what is important to you in your next agreement.

The PSA encourages members to provide your feedback on the government’s offer to your PSA Organiser or directly by email to the PSA office.