Provides processes and procedures for the identification and management of unsatisfactory performance of State School Teachers.
This procedural policy provides a framework within which State School Teachers will have an opportunity to address concerns about unsatisfactory performance in such a way that:
The objective of this Managing Unsatisfactory Performance (MUP) procedural policy is to ensure employees are meeting or exceeding performance expectations.
This procedural policy forms part of the Valuing Performance Policy Statement.
Prior to implementing a MUP process, it is assumed that the employee is aware of expectations of their performance and performance development as conveyed through:
It is essential that employees receive a proper induction according to their needs and the needs of the school and the Department.
A State school teacher’s particular induction needs must be addressed whether they are a beginning teacher, transferring to a new school, transferred/promoted to a new role or returning to teaching after leave of more than 18 months’ duration.
The Principal must ensure that a planned induction:
The Developing Performance Framework is separate from procedures for the management of unsatisfactory performance. It is assumed, however, that expectations of performance and performance development will form part of a written performance management tool, such as the Developing Performance Framework, between the employee and their Principal. The absence of such a written performance management tool does not preclude the application of this policy in the event of an employee’s unsatisfactory performance.
The MUP process is not the appropriate process for identification and delivery of performance development needs – which remains the function of the Developing Performance Framework. Nevertheless previously agreed participation in, and scheduled attendance at, performance development opportunities identified through the Developing Performance Framework will continue throughout the MUP process. Resources and assistance rather than professional development opportunities will be made available to the employee through the MUP process.
Unsatisfactory performance will be the subject of ongoing informal performance feedback between the employee and their Principal. The ongoing informal communication of performance expectations and performance concerns to employees will enable emergent performance concerns to be identified and addressed as they arise.
This informal feedback will also assist the Principal in:
Employees may have a support person accompany them in these informal performance feedback discussions.
It is intended that issues that may lead to a formal MUP process will usually be identified informally in the first instance and formal MUP processes will usually be applied in the event of unaddressed, ongoing and/or significant performance concerns.
Employees who refuse or fail to participate in the MUP process may be liable for disciplinary action under the Public Service Act 2008.
While injury or illness may be a cause of, or contribute to, unsatisfactory performance, each matter should be assessed on a case by case basis to determine whether or not it is appropriate to be managed under the MUP process. In these instances, appropriate consultation with a trained workplace rehabilitation or organisational health officer should be undertaken.
not appropriate that the MUP process be implemented or continued where unsatisfactory performance is associated with a pre-existing illness or injury. When an employee accesses sick leave during a MUP process, that officer may be referred for an Independent Medical Examination where deemed appropriate.
For further information, please contact the Organisational Health Unit.
Where any party directly involved in a MUP process submits during the course of a MUP process a formal complaint associated with the MUP process or against individuals involved in the MUP process, the employee’s Principal will notify the Regional Director or their delegate who will put in place appropriate arrangements for the MUP process to continue according to documented timelines, wherever possible, or with minimal delay in the process.
These arrangements may include but are not limited to:
Performance issues of a sufficiently serious and pressing nature or involving serious risk to student or staff health and safety should be dealt with under the
Public Service Act 2008, the
Code of Conduct for the Queensland Public Service and/or the Department of Education, Training and Employment
Standard of Practice.
Employees will be advised of the intention to implement a formal MUP process and be provided with an opportunity to seek the advice and support of a union representative and/or colleague in all meetings during which matters pertaining to the MUP process are discussed.
Employees will be afforded the opportunity to respond to all performance concerns, including raising possible reasons for unsatisfactory performance.
Where concerns relate to the performance of a State school teacher engaged on a temporary contract, the Principal is obliged to consult with the Regional Human Resources Manager.
The Principal and Regional Human Resources Manager will determine an appropriate means of applying the below MUP process in such a way that takes into consideration the duration of the temporary contract at the Principal’s school and any confirmed future temporary contracts at other schools.
Employees are responsible and accountable for:
The Principal (or delegate) is responsible and accountable for:
The Principal is responsible for all final decisions and recommendations under stages 1 and 2 of the process.
However, a Principal may choose to delegate their supervisory duties to another School Leader (e.g. a Deputy Principal or Head of School).
The Regional Director or their delegate is responsible and accountable for:
The Regional Director is responsible and accountable for:
Board of Review is responsible and accountable to:
Assistant Director-General, Human Resources is responsible and accountable for:
MUP processes provide the employee with an opportunity to address concerns about their performance.
For further information on the stages in a MUP process, refer to the
Performance Process Flowchart and the
State School Teacher Process.
Board of Review
The Board of Review consists of:
Under section 187 of the
Public Service Act 2008 a public service officer chief executive may discipline the officer if the chief executive is reasonably satisfied the officer has:
Examples of disciplinary action that may be taken under section 188 of the
Public Service Act 2008 include:
Disciplinary action can only be instigated by the appropriate delegate.
An ‘employee’ is defined as a person who is employed under the
Teachers’ Award – State 2012 (excluding employees engaged in promotional positions) who is undergoing a Managing Unsatisfactory Performance process.
Managing Unsatisfactory Performance (MUP) – State School Teachers
The process that incorporates the Identification and Improvement plan and the review periods to improve the performance of an employee covered by this procedural policy to a satisfactory standard for their role.
See Managing Unsatisfactory Performance – State School Teachers.
A reference to “Principal” within the procedural policy includes a Principal’s delegate (excluding where the Principal is required to make a decision/recommendation).
Work performance by an employee that is below the satisfactory standard for the role in which they are engaged.
For further information, please contact:
Workforce RelationsHuman ResourcesPhone: (07) 3247 5248Email:
Uncontrolled copy. Refer to the Department of Education Policy and Procedure Register to ensure you have the most current version of this document.
How would you rate this page?
Thank you! We appreciate your feedback.
Share with Facebook
Share with Twitter
Share with LinkedIn
Share with Google+
Share with Pinterest