Fire Brigade Employees' Union v Industrial Relations Secretary

(a) the text and quanta of the accommodation and deployment allowances for firefighters who are sent on intrastate, interstate and international deployments;

(b) how firefighters who have Hazmat and Major/Minor Aerial skills and are employed in positions where it is expected that they will from time to time be required to utilise that skill are to be appropriately remunerated;

(c) how firefighters who are not full-time pilots are to be appropriately remunerated if they are requested to obtain skills to operate RPAS and on each occasion they are required to operate RPAS;

(d) as to the terms of the award clauses necessary to reflect our conclusion that allowances ought to be introduced for retained firefighters who hold additional rescue competencies, along with the quantum of new allowances; and

(e) whether anything beyond the insertion of the words "and practicable" after "reasonably available" in clause 20.7 of the Permanent Award is required to ensure that firefighters are reimbursed whenever they need to use their private vehicle because public transport, while technically available, is impracticable and if there is any other textual amendment to assist to reduce disputation as to the circumstances in which the entitlement arises.

(4) Commissioner McDonald is to provide a report to the Full Bench following conciliation, identifying what has been agreed and what remains to be determined by the Full Bench.

(5) The hearing of the applications for the Crown Employees (Fire and Rescue NSW Firefighting Death and Disability Award) 2024 is adjourned to allow further conciliation before Commissioner McDonald on 11 September 2025 at 10:00am.

1. In addition to the matters identified in order 3, the parties were to confer and if necessary, conciliate, as to the wording of clauses to give effect to the Decision in respect of rescue allowances, on-call and disturbance allowances and executive officers' hours of work.

1. On 18 November 2025, following four listings of the matters for conciliation, Commission McDonald made orders, inter alia, requiring the parties to provide to the Commission further short written submissions in support of their preferred clauses. At a directions hearing on 28 November 2025, the Fire Brigade Employees' Union (FBEU) requested the matter be set down for a further half day hearing.
2. Commissioner McDonald delivered her report to the Full Bench on 3 December 2025. Despite considerable time spent in conciliation the parties were only able to reach agreement in respect of two substantive clauses.
3. Given that the change to the Rescue Allowance, as provided for in the Decision, is to take effect on 26 February 2026 there is some urgency to resolving the outstanding questions. Accordingly, the President listed the matter for a further hearing on 16 December 2025 before the Full Bench. With the consent of the parties the matter proceeded on the basis that the President and Commissioner McDonald would sit, while the Vice President, who was unavailable as he was presiding over another matter, would read the transcript later.

1. The parties have reached agreement on the issue identified in order (3)(a), "the text and quanta of the accommodation and deployment allowances for firefighters who are sent on intrastate, interstate and international deployments", which is reflected in clause 27 of the Permanent Award filed by the FBEU.
2. The parties have also reached agreement on the matter in order (3)(e), namely that nothing beyond the words "and practicable" need to be added after the words "reasonably available" in clauses 20.7.1.2 and 20.7.1.4 of the Permanent Award.
3. The parties have otherwise agreed to a number of typographical and formatting changes to both awards.

1. The issues that were unable to be resolved in conciliation and which as a result fall to be determined in this decision involve the following substantive issues.

(1) As to Rescue Allowances:

(a) Who is entitled to the general land rescue (GLR) allowance?

(b) Who is entitled to a specialised rescue allowance?

(c) How should the quanta of the allowances be calculated and expressed in the Permanent and Retained Awards?

(2) As to Hazmat and Major/Minor Aerial allowances: how are firefighters who have the qualifications and skills to perform this work, and are employed in positions where it is expected that they will, from time to time, be required to utilise those skills, to be appropriately remunerated?

(3) As to the Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) Allowance: who is entitled to it?

(4) As to the On Call and Disturbance Allowance:

(a) How should the term "on call" be defined?

(b) Should Fire and Rescue NSW (FRNSW) be limited in its ability to direct an employee to be on call?

(c) Which issues relating to on call arrangements should the Commissioner consult with the FBEU on?

(d) How should the minimum payment for on call work be calculated and applied?

(5) When are executive officers entitled to be paid or provided time in lieu, for work done over their standard hours of work and how is any such pay or compensation to be calculated?

(6) What is the text for the Senior Firefighter to Station Officer and Station Officer to Inspector promotional pathway clauses?

1. Our task is primarily one of implementing what was determined by the Decision. To the extent that the Decision did not determine a particular outcome, we have considered the submissions put as to what ought to be the proper outcome, in light of the evidence that was put before us in the original proceeding.

1. At [157]-[168] of the Decision, the Full Bench determined that a number of rescue allowances should be payable to firefighters who have particular rescue skills additional to road crash rescue (RCR), provided that the firefighter is attached to a station that does that type of rescue work. The Full Bench determined that a skill-based allowance is not payable to a firefighter who obtained a skill, but is neither in a position to utilise it, nor required by the Commissioner to maintain that skill. At [158] we described the new rescue allowances as being:

"... limited to those firefighters who are attached to stations that are accredited to do that type of rescue work, which have the requisite appliances, and require staff who are trained in using that equipment."

1. The Full Bench proposed that a firefighter who is trained in GLR and attached to an appropriately accredited station should receive a "base allowance" that is half the rate of the existing Rescue Allowance in the current Permanent Award, recognising the fact that the latter allowance was equally payable to RCR operators at an accredited station, but that RCR skills are instead to be reflected in the base rate of pay for all firefighters by way of a general pay rise.
2. The Full Bench further determined that the new GLR allowance could be increased for those who have an additional rescue qualification:

"... in one or more of In Water Flood Rescue, Vertical Rescue, USAR, Trench Rescue, Partial Structural Collapse and Large Animal Rescue. Firefighters should be paid an additional 25% for a single additional qualification or an additional 50% if they hold two or more qualifications. A qualification in Vertical Rescue or USAR alone should attract an additional 50%, given the level of training required to obtain those qualifications. To be clear, the maximum quantum payable in respect of allowances for rescue qualifications would be 150% of the GLR allowance, payable to those trained in Vertical Rescue and/or USAR, and otherwise GLR operators who are qualified in two or more rescue qualifications."

1. The parties were directed to draft clauses to give effect to the Decision and seek conciliation on any differences, failing which the Full Bench would determine the final text. The parties have been unable to agree upon the wording of clauses to give effect to this part of the Decision.
2. The FBEU's proposed clauses are:

15.2.8 The General Land Rescue Allowance set at Item 11 of Table 1 of Schedule 2 is for Non-Officers and Officers who are recognised as qualified rescue operators by the State Rescue Board and who are attached to one of the fire stations listed at schedule X.

...

15.2.12 The In Water Flood Rescue Allowance set at Item X of Table 1 of Schedule 2 is for Non-Officers and Officers who have obtained a qualification in In Water Flood Rescue, and have maintained this qualification, and who are attached to one of the fire stations listed at schedule X.

[The allowances for Trench Rescue, Partial Structural Collapse, Large Animal Rescue, Vertical Rescue and Urban Search and Rescue are provided for in like terms in proposed clauses 15.2.13-15.2.17.]

15.3.6 Where an employee is entitled to one or more of the allowances outlined in 15.2.12-15.2.17, the total maximum payment an employee may receive per week in respect of their entitlements under these clauses cannot equal more than $X. The $X figure referred to in this subclause will increase in line with any percentage increases to the General Land Rescue Allowance.

1. The Secretary's proposed clauses were as follows:.

15.2.11 The General Land Rescue Allowance set at Item 1 of Table 1A Schedule 2 comes into effect and is payable under this award from 26 February 2026. The General Land Rescue Allowance is payable to Non-Officers and Officers who are recognised as a General Land Rescue qualified rescue operator by the State Rescue Board, who must be attached to an Accredited Rescue Unit Station that is accredited for General Land Rescue, and are required by FRNSW to hold, maintain and update their General Land Rescue qualification.

15.2.12 Where an Officer or Non-Officer is entitled to the General Land Rescue Allowance pursuant to subclause 15.2.11, they shall be paid a 25% loading upon the base General Land Rescue Allowance at the rate set out in Item 2 of Table 1A of Schedule 2 if they satisfy just one (1) of the following criteria:

15.2.12 (a) they hold and maintain a qualification for In Water Flood Rescue and are attached to a station that is accredited by the State Rescue Board for In Water Flood Rescue;

15.2.12 (b) they hold and maintain a qualification for Trench Rescue and are attached to a Technical Rescue Station with a Technical Rescue Vehicle;

15.2.12 (c) they hold and maintain a qualification for Partial Structural Collapse and are attached to a Technical Rescue Station with a Technical Rescue Vehicle; or

15.2.12 (d) they hold and maintain a qualification for Large Animal Rescue and are attached to a Technical Rescue Station with a Technical Rescue Vehicle.

15.2.13 Where an Officer or Non-Officer is entitled to the General Land Rescue Allowance pursuant to subclause 15.2.11 and that employee satisfies two (2) or more of the criteria listed in subclauses 15.2.12(a, b, c, d) above, that employee shall be paid a 50% loading upon the base General Land Rescue Allowance set out in Item 3 of Table 1A of Schedule 2.

15.2.14 Where an Officer or Non-Officer is entitled to the General Land Rescue Allowance pursuant to subclause 15.2.11, that employee shall be paid a 50% loading upon the base General Land Rescue Allowance set out in Item 4 of Table 1A of Schedule 2 if they satisfy one or both of the following criteria:

15.2.14 (a) they are directed by FRNSW to hold and maintain a qualification for Vertical Rescue and are attached to a station that is accredited by the State Rescue Board for Vertical Rescue;

15.2.14 (b) they are directed by FRNSW to hold and maintain a qualification for Urban Search and Rescue (category 2).

15.2.15 The maximum loading on the General Land Rescue Allowance available at subclauses 15.2.12, 15.2.13 and 15.2.14 is 50%.

1. An "Accredited Rescue Unit Station" in the Secretary's proposed clauses is defined (in cl 7) as "a station that has been accredited by the State Rescue Board to perform the rescue operations associated with that accreditation in NSW".

1. Before turning to the differences between the parties, we note the Secretary's clause for a GLR allowance contains a transitional arrangement which preserves the existing rescue allowance until 26 February 2026, after which it will be replaced by the GLR allowance. There is no transitional arrangement in the FBEU's proposed clause. We agree there ought to be a transitional clause, and adopt the draft proposed by the Secretary.

1. The FBEU contends that there are GLR trained firefighters who are in fact called on to do GLR work, but who are not attached to accredited GLR stations. The FBEU further contends that there are firefighters who are trained in other forms of rescue who are from time to time called on to do that rescue work, but who are not attached to a station accredited to do that type of rescue work. There was evidence that FRNSW has 275 permanent and 52 retained firefighters qualified in Water Flood Rescue, but only 79 permanent firefighters are based at accredited Floor Rescue units. For that reason, the FBEU asks the Commission to depart from its decision and not limit the rescue allowances to those at stations accredited to do particular rescue work.
2. The FBEU proposes instead that a Schedule should be attached to the Award which lists the stations that attract particular rescue allowances or, alternatively, that references to fire stations should include "any fire station accredited by the State Rescue Board, or any fire station otherwise determined by FRNSW Commissioner following consultation with the Union in accordance with clause 10". The FBEU's approach is designed to ensure that firefighters who hold GLR or other specialised rescue qualifications and who currently perform GLR or other rescue work because they are attached to an accredited RCR station will continue to receive the allowance even though their station is not accredited for GLR or other specialised rescue work. Alternatively, the FBEU proposes that the GLR allowance should be paid wherever a firefighter holds and maintains the accreditation and is available to be deployed to use their accredited skill.
3. The Secretary opposes the use of a Schedule, pointing out that it would need to be varied whenever there are changes to accreditation and/or equipment, and proposes that qualified firefighters should be paid the allowances only if they are attached to stations that are accredited by the State Rescue Board for that type of rescue. The Secretary urges the Commission to adopt the language of the Decision and restrict the allowance to those attached to relevantly accredited stations.
4. The Secretary's clause for the GLR allowance also stipulates that it is payable only to a GLR operator who is "required by FRNSW to hold, maintain and update their General Land Rescue qualification". The FBEU submits that these words are not in the current Award and are ambiguous.
5. Our intention is to limit the GLR allowance, and other rescue allowances, to those firefighters at stations where they might ordinarily be required to exercise those skills using the equipment at that station and who not only have the requisite training but are required by the Commissioner to maintain it.
6. The FBEU contends there are stations that are not accredited to do GLR work but nevertheless have the equipment to do that rescue work from which firefighters who are trained in that rescue work are deployed, from time to time, to do that work. The Secretary does not accept that is correct. The Secretary contends that it is only from stations that are accredited to do particular rescue work that FRNSW needs to train and maintain firefighters in those rescue skills.
7. In circumstances where the evidence in this regard is incomplete and against a background in which we are introducing new allowances that come at a cost to FRNSW, we have decided not to depart from the Decision at [158]. We do not accept that the appropriate course, in light of the different positions of the parties, is to leave this issue to be determined by the parties having further discussions as to the content of a list of stations which are not accredited by the State Rescue Board, but from which firefighters might be deployed to perform GLR or other rescue work. As such we prefer the Secretary's draft clause 15.2.11.
8. The Commission might reconsider this issue in a future proceeding if there was evidence presented that there are firefighters who are encouraged to obtain and maintain a GLR qualification or other rescue qualifications, who are regularly deployed to do that work, and who are at stations which have the requisite equipment to do that rescue work, but who are not entitled to the weekly allowance because, for some reason, their station is not formally accredited to do that type of rescue work.
9. However, this issue is partially addressed by our decision, at [38] below, that firefighters who are called on to exercise a rescue skill they hold despite not being attached to an accredited GLR station are entitled to the allowance on a per day basis on any day where they exercise that skill.

1. While the FBEU initially took the view that the quanta of the non-GLR rescue allowances (and the related daily allowances as provided for at [38] below) should be 25% or 50% of the Rescue Allowance as it was on 26 February 2025 and progressively increased in line with wages from that date, it now accepts that the loading as determined by the Full Bench in the Decision is to be calculated on the basis of the new GLR allowance as the Secretary's proposed clauses provide.

1. The FBEU submits that the quantum of allowances should be expressed as dollar figures, whereas the Secretary has expressed the loadings as percentages.
2. We are content for the allowances to be expressed both ways, as appears in the Secretary's 'List of Disputed Clause' document provided to the Full Bench, which provides both a formula and the dollar amount, and which makes clear that a firefighter cannot be entitled to more than 150% of the GLR allowance.

1. The Hazmat and Major/Minor Aerial allowances in the current Permanent Award are only payable for firefighters who have the relevant qualification and are attached to a station with the relevant equipment. At [175]-[181] of the Decision, the Full Bench determined that this allowance should continue to only be paid to firefighters with the relevant qualification and who are employed in positions where they are required to utilise that skill. In addition, the Full Bench directed the parties to have discussions as to the creation of two additional payments: a one-off payment if a firefighter who is not attached to a relevant station is requested by FRNSW to obtain that skill and does so, and an allowance payment equal to one fifth of the weekly allowance on each day they are deployed to use a relevant skill.
2. The Secretary proposed the following text to give effect to the decision.

Major and Minor Aerial Allowance

X.1 Unless otherwise provided for in this Award, in addition to the rates of pay prescribed in Tables 1 & 2 of Schedule 1, employees, where applicable, shall be paid the following Allowances:

X.1(a) the Major Aerial Allowance is set at Item 1 of Table XB of Schedule 2, per week, for:

(i) Non-Officers who are qualified to operate a Major Aerial Appliance and who are attached to a station with this equipment; and

(ii) Officers who are qualified to operate a Combined Aerial Pumper Appliance and who are attached to a station with this equipment.

X.1(b) If, at the request of the Commissioner, a:

(i) Non-Officer becomes qualified to operate a Major Aerial Appliance; or

(ii) an Officer becomes qualified to operate a Combined Aerial Pumper,

and at the time the qualification is completed, the Non-Officer or Officer is not attached to a station with a Major Aerial Appliance (in the case of a Non-Officer) or Combined Aerial Pumper Appliance (in the case of an Officer), and the Non-Officer or Officer is not otherwise entitled to the Major Aerial Allowance pursuant to subclause X.1(a), they are eligible to be paid a one-off payment of the Major Aerial Qualification Allowance set out in Item 2 of Table XB of Schedule 2 at the time they initially obtain the qualification.

X.1(c) If a:

(i) Non-Officer who is qualified to operate a Major Aerial Appliance, and who is not attached to a station with this equipment; or

(ii) an Officer who is qualified to operate a Combined Aerial Pumper Appliance and who is not attached to a station with this equipment,

is directed by the Commissioner to perform an Outduty, Standby or recall at a station with a Major Aerial Appliance (in the case of a Non-Officer) or Combined Aerial Pumper Appliance (in the case of an Officer), they are eligible to be paid 25% of the Major Aerial Allowance set out in Item 3 of Table XB of Schedule 2 for each shift in which they are directed to use the specialist skills associated with their qualification.

X.1(d) The Minor Aerial Allowance is set at Item 4 of Table X of Schedule 2, per week, for Non-Officers and Officers who are qualified to operate a Minor Aerial Appliance and who are attached to a station with this equipment.

X.1(e) If, at the request of the Commissioner, a Non-Officer or Officer becomes qualified to operate a Minor Aerial appliance, and at the time the qualification is completed, the Non-Officer or Officer is not attached to a station with that equipment, and the Non-Officer or Officer is not otherwise entitled to the Minor Aerial Allowance pursuant to subclause X.1(d), they are eligible to be paid a one-off payment of the Minor Aerial Qualification Allowance set out in Item 5 of Table 1B of Schedule 2 at the time they initially obtain the qualification.

X.1(f) If a Non-Officer or Officer who is qualified to operate a Minor Aerial Appliance, and who is not attached to a station with this equipment, is directed by the Commissioner to perform an Outduty, Standby or recall at a station with a Minor Aerial Appliance, they are eligible to be paid 25% of the Minor Aerial Allowance set out in Item 6 of Table XB of Schedule 2 for each shift in which they are directed to use the specialist skills associated with their qualification.

X.2 The Major and Minor Aerial allowances set at subclauses X.1(a)-(c) and X.1(d)-(f) respectively, shall not be paid concurrently. In situations where both allowances would otherwise apply pursuant to this clause, the Major Aerial Allowance only shall be paid.

Hazmat Allowance

X.3

Unless otherwise provided for in this Award, in addition to the rates of pay prescribed in Tables 1 & 2 of Schedule 1, employees, where applicable, shall be paid the following Allowances**:**

(i) the Hazmat Allowance is set out at Item 5 of Table XB of Schedule 2, per week, for Non-Officers and Officers who are:

(A) qualified in Hazmat; and

(B) attached to a Heavy Hazmat station within Sydney, Newcastle, Wollongong or the Central Coast (Heavy Hazmat Station).

(ii) If, at the request of the Commissioner, a Non-Officer or Officer becomes qualified in Hazmat, but at the time the qualification is completed, the Non-Officer or Officer is not attached to a Heavy Hazmat Station, and they are not otherwise entitled to the Hazmat Allowance pursuant to subclause 15.2.5, they are eligible to be paid a one - off payment of the Hazmat Qualification Allowance set out in Item X of TableX1B of Schedule 2 at the time they initially obtain the qualification.

(iii) If a Non-Officer or Officer who is qualified in Hazmat, and who is not attached to a Heavy Hazmat Station, is directed by the Commissioner to perform an Outduty, Standby or recall at a Heavy Hazmat Station, they are eligible to be paid 25% of the Hazmat Allowance set out in Item X of Table XB of Schedule 2 for each shift in which they are directed to use the specialist skills associated with their qualification.

1. Although the FBEU proposed the retention of the current Hazmat and Major/Minor Aerial allowance clauses at 15.2.3, 15.2.4 and 15.2.5 of the Permanent Award, it did not raise any substantive objections to the wording of the Secretary's proposed X.1(a), X.1(d) and X.3(i). The FBEU was otherwise content with the Secretary's clauses but, as noted below, sought for the approach taken to be extended to other rescue allowances.

Daily allowances for firefighters not attached to relevant accredited stations

1. The Secretary's proposed clauses make payable a one-off 'qualification' allowance and a 'per-shift' allowance to firefighters in respect of Hazmat and Major/Minor Aerial skills.
2. The FBEU's proposed clauses extend that approach to other rescue skills. The FBEU proposes the following clauses to give effect to the Decision.

15.3.7.1 An employee who becomes qualified in any of the following qualifications, who is not attached to a fire station entitling them to an allowance in accordance with subclause 15.2, will receive a one-off allowance at the time of qualification equal to $X amount:

• Hazmat

• Major Aerial

• Minor Aerial

• General Land Rescue

• In Water Flood Rescue

• Trench Rescue

• Partial Structural Collapse

• Large Animal Rescue

• Vertical Rescue

• Urban Search and Rescue

15.3.7.2 An employee who obtains and maintains any of the qualifications listed in 15.3.7.1, but is not attached to a fire station entitling them to an allowance in accordance with subclause 15.2, will receive one quarter of the relevant allowance amount for each shift they perform at a relevant location to which an employee attached (and qualified) would receive the allowance and/or for each shift they are deployed by FRNSW to utilise the relevant qualification. For the avoidance of doubt, employees are entitled to be paid multiple allowances under this subclause.

1. The FBEU contends that the Full Bench's reasons at [179]-[181], although directed to resolving claims specific to Hazmat, Major Aerial and Minor Aerial allowances, is expressed in language that applies to the utilisation of other rescue skills to the extent they too are sought to be utilised by the Commissioner upon a firefighter being deployed to use a relevant skill.
2. At the hearing the Secretary amended his position to align more closely with the FBEU's position, accepting that in respect of all rescue qualifications, a firefighter should be entitled to a shift payment equal to one quarter of the weekly GLR allowance on each day they are deployed to use a relevant skill if they are not attached to an accredited station, as the Full Bench had determined for the Hazmat and Major/Minor Aerial qualifications. The concession was limited to an allowance that would be set at 25% of the GLR allowance rate, regardless of which rescue skill was being utilised, for administrative ease and because only one skill is being utilised at a time. The Secretary's concession did not extend to a payment for the training for such a qualification.
3. We agree with the parties that as a matter of industrial fairness the approach determined by us to pay a daily Hazmat and Major/Minor Aerial allowance to a firefighter who is asked to do such work despite not being attached to a station accredited to do that work ought to extend to all rescue allowances.
4. We further agree with the Secretary that the relevant sum should be based on the GLR allowance, regardless of the number of skills held by a firefighter.
5. Contrary to the position of the Secretary, we determine that the one-off payment for obtaining a rescue qualification also ought to apply to all rescue allowances, as it will for obtaining Hazmat and Major/Minor Aerial qualifications.

1. The quantum of the daily payment in the clauses proposed by both parties is 25% of the weekly allowance (as opposed to 20%), to better reflect the 4-shift rotational roster of firefighters. That position is accepted.
2. Proposed clause X.2 from the Secretary stipulates that the Major Aerial and Minor Aerial allowances set out in its draft clauses cannot be paid concurrently, and that in situations where both allowances would otherwise apply, only the Major Aerial Allowance shall be paid. We agree that no more than one of the Major Aerial and Minor Aerial allowances should be paid for any given day.
3. We further agree with the Secretary that the allowance to be paid to firefighters who are deployed to use rescue skills will in each case be 25% of the GLR weekly allowance, regardless of the rescue category. This will mean that each type of skill is compensated equally despite them being of differing levels of training and complexity, but we adopt the Secretary's position because of its administrative efficiency, noting that such deployments are not likely to occur regularly.

Quanta of allowances - one-off qualification payment

1. The quantum of the one-off qualification payment proposed by the Secretary is derived by taking 25% of the weekly allowance and multiplying that per day of training, with the result then discounted by 50% "reflecting the fact no actual work is performed".
2. The FBEU accepts that linking the amount to the duration of the relevant training course is a reasonable approach but does not support the reduction of the rate on the basis that there are "circumstances where employees are most definitely working when participating in training and are expected to be demonstrating use of the relevant skill".
3. We do not accept either proposal. The intention of the one-off payment is to incentivise firefighters to take up the additional training in circumstances where the usual incentive (access to an ongoing weekly allowance) is not available. We accept the incentive does not need to be very large noting that firefighters will receive their ordinary pay while being trained, but it ought to be more than the amount that either party put to us in respect of the qualifications that can be achieved in a small number of days. We determine the payments to be set as follows:

1. At [195] of the Decision, the Full Bench determined that firefighters based at stations who are qualified to operate RPAS (also known as drones), undertake skill maintenance, and do that work from time to time because they work at stations where drones need to be operated, should receive payments similar to the Hazmat and Major/Minor Aerial allowances.
2. The clauses proposed by the FBEU and Secretary differ from the Full Bench's Decision, as they both set a weekly allowance for firefighters who have obtained a RPAS qualification and have maintained it.
3. The FBEU's clause is as follows:

The Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Allowance set at Item X of Table 1 of Schedule 2 is for Non-Officers and Officers who have obtained a qualification in Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems and have maintained this qualification.

1. The Secretary's proposed clause excludes the five non-station based staff from the Bushfire and Aviation Branch who are employed as full-time pilots and are otherwise entitled to a non-station based staff allowance:

With the exception of already qualified Non-Station Based staff from the Bushfire and Aviation Branch, the Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Allowance set at Item X of Table 1 of Schedule 2 is for Officer and Non-Officers who have obtained a qualification in Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems, and have maintained this qualification.

1. The FBEU accepts that the Secretary's drafting should be accepted if the Full Bench intended to exclude the station-based pilots from the RPAS allowance. That was our intention. That is because the full-time pilots are not station based and so obtain an additional allowance of 15-20%.

1. At [212]-[224] of the Decision, the Full Bench determined that there should be the creation of an on call allowance for employees who are rostered to be on call, that is, to be available to be recalled to the workplace outside of their ordinary hours, and separately, a disturbance allowance payable to those employees who are required to be available to respond to work-related queries when not at work, but are not required to return to the workplace.
2. The parties agree that the on call allowance and disturbance allowance should be combined into a single allowance. We consider that to be sensible.
3. The parties disagree on how 'on call' should be defined in the clause, the quantum of the allowance, whether an employee can be directed to be on call and how often, and the application of a minimum 2-hour payment for work performed during an on call period.

1. There is agreement that the concept of being "on call" is to be defined by reference to a period when an employee is rostered to be available to be contacted outside their ordinary working hours to perform work, either at the workplace or at home, although the definitions in the parties' agreed clauses differ slightly.
2. The FBEU's proposed draft clause 32.1 defines "on call" as referring "to any period during which an employee is rostered to be available or is directed by the Commissioner to be available to be contacted outside of their ordinary working hours, such as receiving calls or other forms of communication and/or being required to return to duty".
3. The Secretary's proposed definition is:

"On-Call" refers to any period during which an employee is rostered by the Commissioner to be On-Call outside of their ordinary working hours. Whilst rostered On-Call an employee is required to be available to receive calls or other forms of communication, perform work tasks from home and/or return to duty.

1. We consider it important that there be certainty as to whether a firefighter has been rostered to be on call.
2. The allowance is being included in the Award to recognise that some firefighters in particular roles are currently rostered to be on call and that they ought to receive recompense when they are so rostered. The Secretary informed the Commission that such positions are advertised on the basis that a successful candidate will be required to be on call. It is no part of either party's case that the creation of the allowance should give rise to a change to the way by which firefighters are expected to be on call. Certainly, in creating the allowance we did not intend to bring about change in the way firefighters are rostered to work on call.
3. For that reason, we do not agree with the FBEU that the allowance ought to be paid where firefighters are "directed to be available", but prefer, as the Secretary proposes, to have the allowance limited to where firefighters are "rostered" to be on call.
4. While there is some circularity to a definition of 'on call' being where an employee is "rostered on call", it has the benefit of certainty; it is payable only where the roster designates the employee to be on call.
5. For those reasons we consider the definition ought to be:

On Call refers to any period during which an employee is rostered by the Commissioner to be on call outside of ordinary hours to be available to receive calls or other forms of communication, and if requested perform work tasks from home and/or return to duty.

1. The FBEU proposes a quantum of $39 per day for a workday and $65 per day for a non-work day. Those figures were said to be reached by adding the $120 weekly on call allowance and $35 per day disturbance allowance (as determined by the Decision), dividing what was said to be the resultant sum of $245 total across 7 days, and in some manner apportioning it across work days and non-work days.
2. The Secretary seeks a quantum of $17.50 per day for a workday and $30.00 per day for a non-work day. Those amounts were also said to be in some way calculated in an unidentified manner, but are said to be closer to similar allowances relating to other emergency services such as police officers ($22.80/$34.14) and paramedics ($29.50), lowered to account for the fact that the on call allowance will usually only be accessed by relatively senior employees (who already receive a high level of remuneration) or those holding non-station based roles (who can access the non-station based allowance).
3. The allowance is to compensate for the disability of the firefighter having to hold themselves ready to respond out of hours. This affects their ability to engage in social activities or travel away from the work location. This is less of an issue on days a firefighter is otherwise working. Also, on such days the firefighter is on call for fewer hours. In the Decision we determined, following the approach of the NSW Ambulance Paramedics (State) Award 2023, to set an on call allowance of $120 per week, which is a little above $17 a day, for a week that a firefighter is not working. That is less than either party suggests: the Secretary's proposal will result in a firefighter on call for 7 days when not rostered to work being paid almost double the proposed rate, namely $210 per day. But for the Secretary's position we would have set it at a lower rate, but in light of the Secretary's position we accept that it be set at $17.50 per day for a workday and $30.00 per day for a non-work day.

1. The FBEU contended that no employee should be directed to be on call and that a consultation mechanism should be introduced for the purpose of limiting the frequency of on call rostering. It "strongly" pressed its claim in relation to proposed subclauses 32.3 and 32.4:

32.3 Employees will generally not be contacted by FRNSW whilst on annual, long service, personal or consolidated leave, or at any other time the employee is not being paid to work or be On-Call, unless it is for exceptional circumstances such as recall in an emergency in accordance with section 27 of the Fire and Rescue NSW Regulation 2023.

32.4 Employees cannot be directed and/or required to be On-Call unless it is a requirement of their role and the employee agrees to being On-Call.

1. In his reply submissions, the Secretary submitted that given its statutory powers FRNSW "can direct a firefighter to be on-call regardless of what the award says" and the "proposed clause would simply deprive employees directed to be on-call from access to the allowance".
2. In supplementary submissions, the FBEU accepted that the clauses it sought to limit the capacity to roster on call were new claims advanced after the Decision.
3. The FBEU's claims made after the close of proceedings arise as a result of its success in advancing a claim to include an on call allowance. We do not have evidence before us that would allow us to be satisfied that the claimed clauses are necessary to ensure fair and reasonable conditions. As earlier noted, there is no suggestion that the creation of the allowance will bring about a change to how firefighters are currently rostered on call. We are not prepared to award such claims given they are raised at this stage of the proceedings and for those reasons we reject the FBEU proposed subclauses 32.3 and 32.4. We note, however, that appropriate business rules for on call are to be developed following consultation, as addressed in the next section. In reaching these conclusions we do not foreclose the potential of the FBEU to notify a dispute and seek a recommendation that the Commissioner refrain from rostering firefighters on call in a manner that differs from established custom and practice and that is objectively unfair.

1. The parties agree that there ought to be a clause obliging them to consult on arrangements for employees to be required to be on call. Principally at issue is whether the clause ought to include the FBEU's proposal of "aiming for a limit of 7 days in any 28 day period".
2. We agree with the Secretary that the latter proposal is one being put forward after the Decision and presupposes what ought to be the outcome of a consultation process.
3. Having considered the parties' competing proposed clauses we determine that the consultation clause be as follows:

The Commissioner is to consult with the Union before publishing business rules for the management of on-call arrangements, which are to include reasonable limits on the frequency of on-call rostering.

Minimum payment if required to work while on call (non-Executive Officers)

"An employee who is contacted to perform work and/or required to return to duty while On-Call will be paid in accordance with clause X, Overtime, except for Executive Officers who will be paid in accordance with clause X, Executive Officer Hours of Work."

1. The Secretary's proposed subclause is as follows:

32.4 Where an employee is rostered to be On-Call and is contacted outside their ordinary hours of work and is required to perform work whether from home, by attending a FRNSW workplace, or responding to an incident, the employee will be entitled to a minimum payment of two hours at the applicable overtime rates as prescribed by clause 24.1 except for Executive Officers who will be paid in accordance with clause X, Executive Officer Hours of Work.

32.4.1 The minimum two-hour payment applies regardless of the actual duration of work performed. If multiple calls or tasks occur within this two-hour period, only once minimum payment will apply.

32.4.2 Where an employee is required to respond to an incident or return to a FRNSW workplace the two-hour minimum payment period will commence from the time the employee received the call, including reasonable travel time to the incident or workplace.

32.4.3 If the work performed extends beyond the initial two-hour minimum period, the employee will be paid for the additional time worked at the applicable overtime rate.

1. The key difference between the parties is the limitation in the Commissioner's proposed subclause 32.4.1 confirming that there can be only one minimum payment paid in respect of work done during the same initial 2-hour period, even if an employee is required to attend to multiple, different tasks during that time and even if required to return to the workplace more than once within that 20-hour period. The alternative position for which the FBEU contended could give rise to industrially unfair outcomes, noting that the work might be work from home. As the Secretary submitted, if an employee is called at home on 4 occasions over a 2-hour period and is required each time to do 10 minutes of work, there is no industrial merit to that employee receiving 4, 2-hour minimum payments (ie 8 hours' pay).
2. We determine to adopt the Secretary's proposed text.

1. In [465]-[477] of the Decision, we determined that Executive Officers should be paid for work done outside the ordinary span of hours that they normally work because they are directed or required to work as a result of a particular incident. We also determined that such work should be compensated at their ordinary rate of pay with a minimum payment of 2 hours.
2. At [471] we described the current entitlements of Executive Officers as follows:

"The nature of the work of Executive Officers commonly requires them to work beyond the hours of a standard day to get the work done. While that work has to be done, as that additional time is largely self-directed they retain some level of control over when they work those additional hours. They account for the additional hours and seek and obtain approval to take TOIL to compensate them for those hours."

1. We were mindful of the fact that to extend an entitlement to be paid for additional hours for such workers (as against take time off in lieu) was unusual, and would be extended only in limited circumstances. In particular we said the following at [475]-[476]:

"However, while we are not minded to grant a claim that would see Executive Officers entitled to be paid for additional hours worked, we take a different view in respect of hours worked outside the ordinary span of hours that Executive Officers are directed or required to work as a result of a particular incident. ...

To be clear, we do not have in mind situations where an Executive Officer works additional hours to complete their usual work duties (which ought to continue to be addressed by the current entitlement to TOIL), nor a situation where an Executive Officer is contacted out of hours and as a result does some work from home. Rather, we have in mind the limited circumstance where an Executive Officer attends work (including an incident location) on a weekend or public holiday, or attends or remains at work after 6pm on an ordinary work day, in circumstances where he or she is directed (as in Mr Chetwynd's second example) or required (as in his first example) to do so. While there is evidence that in such cases the Commissioner from time to time exercises a discretion to pay overtime for such hours and does so at the employee's usual hourly rate of pay, in our view there ought to be an entitlement for Executive Officers to be paid for such work, not at overtime rates, but at their ordinary rate of pay with a minimum payment of 2 hours. Ordinarily an Executive Officer would need to seek and obtain verbal or written approval from their manager in advance of attending work to qualify for payment rather than pay in lieu. In an emergency situation an Executive Officer may not be able to get approval in advance. In such a case they would be entitled to be paid rather than take TOIL if FRNSW determines after the event that in the circumstances their presence was required."

1. The parties have reached agreement in the form of proposed clauses 83.1 to 83.5 as to how Executive Officers are to have hours above 40 hours recorded and compensated.
2. We are content to adopt proposed clauses 83.1 to 83.3, as follows.

83.1 Superintendents and Chief Superintendents are required to work a 40 hour week. The 40 hours are to be performed on a flexible basis according to the needs of the organisation on weekdays between 0600 hrs and 1800 hrs on a self-directed rostering basis.

83.2 All hours worked by Superintendents and Chief Superintendents must be recorded in a manner determined by FRNSW in accordance with the Executive Officer Hours of Work Policy. This policy will be the subject of consultation in accordance with clause X Consultation.

83.3 Where a Superintendent or Chief Superintendent works more than 40 hours in a week within the hours specified in subclause 83.1, such additional hours will be accrued by the employee as time off in lieu at equal numbers of hours to the additional hours worked and be taken in accordance with the Executive Officer Hours of Work Policy.

1. We are prepared to adopt proposed agreed clause 83.4, as follows, but with additional sentences reflecting [476] of the Decision:

83.4 Superintendents or Chief Superintendents that are required or directed to perform duties relating to:

• incident response; and/or

• emergency response; and/or

• emergency management

outside the hours specified in 83.1 on weekdays, and at any time on weekends or on public holidays, may elect to either be paid for such time worked at their single hourly rate of pay, or accrue as time off in lieu. In these instances, regardless of time worked, payment for duties, or accrued time off in lieu will be a minimum of 2 hours. An Executive Officer should, where practicable, inform the employee's manager/supervisor of the intention to work such additional hours out of hours and obtain approval to do so. A failure to do so however does not disentitle the employee from electing to be paid for such hours if they are worked in accordance with this subclause.

1. Proposed clause 83.5 from the FBEU and Secretary was agreed, except that the Secretary sought to include the words "and approval" as emphasised below:

Additional hours of work that occur outside of the hours specified in 83.1 on weekdays, and at any time on weekends or on public holidays, that do not fall within the scope of work outlined in 83.4, including special events, should where practicable, be discussed and approval sought in advance with the employee's manager/supervisor.

Where the employee is required or directed perform such additional work, they may elect to either be paid for such time worked at their single hourly rate of pay or accrue as time off in lieu. In these instances, regardless of time worked, payment for duties, or accrued time off in lieu will be a minimum of 2 hours.

1. We are not prepared to adopt either version of clause 83.5. We consider this drafting to be ambiguous, and it arguably fails to make clear that the capacity for an Executive Officer to obtain payment for additional hours, other than in the circumstances contemplated by clause 83.4, arises only if they are required by the Commissioner to do work out of hours, rather than as a result of the Executive Officer determining for themselves that they need to do the work at that time. Nor do we agree that there is the need, outside of a call to attend an incident or emergency, for an Executive Officer to accrue time off in lieu or be paid a minimum 2-hour payment for such work. In the Decision we identified the existence of a current practice of the Commissioner to exercise a discretion to pay out some additional hours worked where the Executive Officer is given a task that gives rise to unusual additional hours, such as deployment into specific roles. It is not our intention to remove the ongoing exercise of that discretion.
2. As a result we recast clause 83.5 to read as follows:

Where an Executive Officer is directed or required to work on a weekend or before 0600 hours or after 1800 hours on a weekday, such as to attend a special event, the Executive Officer may elect to either accrue the worked hours as time off in lieu or have them paid at their single hourly rate of pay. However, outside of the circumstances contemplated by clause 83.4, the entitlement to elect to be paid does not arise where the Executive Officer determined for themselves when to do the particular work in question and elected to do it out of hours. Nothing in this clause prevents the Commissioner exercising a discretion to pay out additional time worked at the single hourly rate of pay.

Executive officers required to work when rostered on call

1. The parties have reached a consent position that Executive Officers are to be paid for additional hours work if the work arises while they are on call, including if they are only required to work from home. Given that is a consent position, we are prepared to adopt it. We do so without suggesting that such a position is one we would adopt if the issue were to be arbitrated, noting the matters we addressed in the Decision at [471]-[473] that arise from the senior nature of such positions.
2. The consent position includes that such work attracts a minimum 2-hour payment. The parties are however at odds as to how that minimum payment ought to be calculated, adopting the same positions described in respect of non-Executive Officers above. For the reasons expressed above we prefer the approach of the Secretary, to ensure that an Executive Officer is not entitled to multiple minimum payments for work done in the same 2-hour period.
3. As a result, we will include in the Permanent Award the Secretary's proposed draft clause 86.6, as follows:

83.6 Where a Superintendent or Chief Superintendent is rostered to be On-call in accordance with clause 32 and is subsequently required to perform work at home, physically return to a FRNSW workplace, or respond to an incident the employee will be entitled to a two-hour minimum payment. Employees may elect to either be paid for such time at their single hourly rate of pay or accrue time off in lieu.

83.6.1 The minimum two-hour payment applies regardless of the actual duration of work performed. If multiple calls or tasks occur within this two-hour period, only one minimum payment will apply.

83.6.2 If the work performed extends beyond the initial two-hour minimum period, the Superintendent or Chief Superintendent will be entitled to payment for all additional time worked in excess of the two-hour minimum payment at the single hourly rate of pay or accrued time in lieu.

1. At the time that the Decision was published, the Full Bench was informed that the FBEU and the Commissioner had reached a consent position on the Senior Firefighter to Station Officer promotional pathway and were in the process of agreeing on the text for a clause for the Station Officer to Inspector promotional pathway.
2. The Full Bench has now been informed that while the FBEU and the Commissioner have reached agreement on the text of the two promotional pathway clauses, the Secretary has not yet obtained formal approval to consent to the inclusion of the clauses in the Award. It is unfortunate that despite the lengthy time that has elapsed the Secretary has not yet been able to obtain the necessary approval.
3. As the two clauses were not the subject of evidence or submissions, and are not yet the subject of a consent application, we are unable to include them in the Permanent Award at this stage. However we understand the Secretary has taken steps to obtain the necessary approval, and we expect that upon that being obtained the parties will make a consent application to vary the Permanent Award to contain those provisions.
4. In light of the history of these matters, we grant leave for either party to apply to vary the Permanent Award to include clauses dealing with the promotional pathway from Senior Firefighter to Station Officer and from Station Officer to Inspector.

1. The Full Bench determined that allowances should be paid to retained firefighters who hold competencies in GLR, In Water Flood Rescue, Vertical Rescue, Urban Search and Rescue, Trench Rescue, Partial Structural Collapse and Large Animal Rescue, provided they are only payable to firefighters who the Commissioner has determined should obtain and maintain the competencies and skills in the relevant type of rescue work, and only while they maintain those competencies while attached to stations that have the equipment to undertake the rescue work in question and are accredited to undertake the work. The parties were directed to have discussions as to the quanta of such allowances.
2. The Secretary, adopting what the Full Bench stated in the Decision might be a suitable starting point, submits that the quantum of a rescue allowance for a retained firefighter should vary depending on which retainer they are on, so that a firefighter on a 100% retainer is paid the same allowance as a permanent firefighter, whereas a firefighter on a 25% retainer would receive an allowance that is prorated at 25% of the allowance payable to a permanent firefighter.
3. The FBEU submits that the quantum of the allowance for retained firefighters should be identical with the quantum of the allowance for permanent firefighters. The FBEU notes that the 25% retainer is not indicative of the number of hours that a retained firefighter works nor the number of hours a retained firefighter in fact makes themselves available. The FBEU contends that the work to obtain and maintain the skill is the same, however many hours a retained firefighter works.
4. As noted in the Decision at [244], [247]-[248], there is a need for a review of the way in which retained firefighters are remunerated generally. Any such review would appropriately reconsider the rescue allowance that we hereby set.
5. The revised retainer payment per fortnight for a firefighter at the base (25%) level is $89.75 per fortnight. The Secretary's proposal would see a retained firefighter who has a GLR competency and is attached to a GLR accredited station be paid in addition each fortnight an allowance of $16.58 (being 25% of the GLR rate of $33.15 per week or $66.30 per fortnight). While not a large sum, it amounts to a 18.5% uplift in fortnightly fixed payments, which is significant and, on its face, not inappropriate. The FBEU position, in contrast, would see the fortnightly fixed payments increase by 74% which, on the limited material, seems excessive.
6. For those reasons we have decided to adopt the proposed Retained Award clauses addressing rescue allowances as proposed by the Secretary.

1. The parties largely agree on the wording of the RPAS allowance in the Retained Award, except that the Secretary's draft clause has the additional words "at the direction of the Commissioner":

"The Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Allowance set at Item X of Table 1 of Schedule 2 is for Retained Firefighters who have obtained a qualification in Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems at the direction of the Commissioner and have maintained this qualification."

1. A retained firefighter ought not be entitled to the allowance if they obtain the qualification entirely at their own election. However, the allowance ought to be payable if they have the qualification and the Commissioner wishes them to use it. As a result we determine the following clause be included:

The Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Allowance set at Item X of Table 1 of Schedule 2 is for Retained Firefighters who have obtained and maintained a qualification in Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems and are approved by the Commissioner to use it.

1. At the time of handing down this decision we provide to the parties draft marked up Awards that reflect this decision. The parties will have until 23 January 2026 to identify any infelicity in language that ought to be corrected. We will then formally make the Awards, effective 26 February 2024 as soon thereafter as practicable. We expect, however, that the Secretary will not wait until then to commence the process of making the necessary administrative arrangements to have payroll changes take effect on or as soon after 26 February 2026 as practicable.

(1) The parties are to file by 23 January 2026 an agreed document, or, if not agreed, competing documents, that identify any changes that they say ought to be made to the content of the draft Awards provided by the Commission to the parties on 19 December 2025 to properly reflect the intent of the Commission's decisions in these proceedings.

[1] [2025] NSWIRComm 1063.