20Entitlement to review under this Subdivision

#### 20 Entitlement to review under this Subdivision Decisions affecting ongoing APS employees—applications for promotion review (1) A person who is an ongoing APS employee in an Agency is entitled to a review, under this Subdivision, of a decision by the Agency Head or a delegate of the Agency Head, if: (a) the person has applied to be promoted to a vacancy in the Agency for a position with a classification mentioned in any of Groups 2 to 6 set out in Schedule 1 to the Classification Rules; and (b) the decision is: (i) to engage an ongoing Parliamentary Service employee in the circumstance mentioned in subsection (3), or to promote another APS employee, to the vacancy; or (ii) if, as a result of the selection process for the vacancy, a merit pool, a ranked merit pool or a ranked merit list has been created—to engage an ongoing Parliamentary Service employee in the circumstance mentioned in subsection (3), or to promote another APS employee, from that merit pool, ranked merit pool or ranked merit list to a similar vacancy; and (c) the person believes that the decision: (i) was not based on merit (within the meaning of subsection 10A(2) of the Act); or (ii) was not undertaken in accordance with the requirements for conducting merit‑based selection processes specified by the Commissioner’s Directions. Decisions affecting ongoing Parliamentary Service employees—applications for engagement at a higher classification level than current classification level review (2) A person who is an ongoing Parliamentary Service employee may apply for a review, under this Subdivision, of a decision by the Agency Head of an Agency or a delegate of the Agency Head, if: (a) the person has applied to be engaged as an APS employee in a vacancy in the Agency for a position with a classification mentioned in any of Groups 2 to 6 set out in Schedule 1 to the Classification Rules; and (b) that classification is a higher classification than the person’s classification as a Parliamentary Service employee; and (c) the decision is: (i) to engage another ongoing Parliamentary Service employee in the circumstance mentioned in subsection (3), or to promote an APS employee, to the vacancy; or (ii) if, as a result of the selection process for the vacancy, a merit pool, ranked merit pool or ranked merit list has been created—to engage another ongoing Parliamentary Service employee in the circumstance mentioned in subsection (3), or to promote an APS employee, from the merit pool, ranked merit pool or ranked merit list to a similar vacancy; and (d) the person believes that the decision: (i) was not based on merit (within the meaning of subsection 10A(2) of the Act); or (ii) was not undertaken in accordance with the requirements for conducting merit‑based selection processes specified by the Commissioner’s Directions. > Note: For higher classification, in relation to an ongoing Parliamentary Service employee, see section 6. Circumstance in which engagement of ongoing Parliamentary Service employee is relevant (3) For the purposes of subparagraphs (1)(b)(i) and (ii) and (2)(c)(i) and (ii), the circumstance is that the classification of the position to which the ongoing Parliamentary Service employee is engaged is a higher classification than the employee’s classification as a Parliamentary Service employee. Decisions that are not reviewable under this Subdivision (4) However, a person is not entitled to a review under this Subdivision of a decision mentioned in subsection (1) or (2) in relation to the engagement or promotion of a person (the other person) to a vacancy, if: (a) the other person was engaged or promoted to the vacancy on the recommendation of an Independent Selection Advisory Committee; or (b) the other person was engaged or promoted to the vacancy (including from a merit pool, ranked merit pool or ranked merit list) as a result of a selection process that the Merit Protection Commissioner has decided, following a review under this Division: (i) met the requirements in subsection 23(1) (see subsection 24(1)); or (ii) resulted in outcomes that would not have been materially different had the selection process met the requirements in subsection 23(1) (see subsection 24(3)); or (iii) met the requirements in subsection 28(1) (see subsection 29(1)); or (iv) resulted in outcomes that would not have been materially different had the selection process met the requirements in subsection 28(1) (see subsection 29(3)); or (c) the other person was engaged or promoted to the vacancy from a merit pool, ranked merit pool or ranked merit list created on the recommendation of the Merit Protection Commissioner under subsection 24(4).