sct annualreport2015-16 [vr11]...

ANNUAL REPORT

2015/16

© Commonwealth of Australia 2016

With the exception of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms and any third party material,

this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia licence

(creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en).

To the extent that copyright subsists in third party material, it remains with the original

owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.

The terms under which the Coat of Arms can be used are detailed on the following

website: www.itsanhonour.gov.au/coat-arms/.

Content from this publication should be attributed as: Superannuation Complaints

Tribunal, Annual Report 2015-16.

ISSN 1324-8014

Produced by Transform Communications

Designed by I.D.Yours

Printed by Rothfi eld Print & Image Management

The Hon. Kelly O’Dwyer MP

Minister for Revenue and Financial Services

Parliament House

CANBERRA ACT 2600

Dear Minister

I have pleasure in submitting to you for presentation to the Parliament the

twenty-second annual report of the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal for

the year ended 30 June 2016, as required by s 67(1) of the Superannuation

(Resolution of Complaints) Act 1993.

Section 67(2) of the Superannuation (Resolution of Complaints) Act 1993 obliges

you to cause the report to be laid before each House of the Parliament within

fi fteen sitting days of receiving it.

Yours sincerely

Helen Davis

Chairperson

18 October 2016

Cc: Treasurer, the Hon Scott Morrison MP

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

Level 7, 120 Collins Street, Melbourne 3000Postal Address: Locked Bag 3060, Melbourne VIC 3001

Telephone (Inquiries and Complaints): 1300 884 114Telephone (Administration): (03) 8635 5500 Fax: (03) 8635 5588

Website: www.sct.gov.au

I

About the TribunalThe Superannuation Complaints Tribunal (Tribunal) is an independent dispute resolution body

which deals with a diverse range of superannuation-related complaints and offers a free, user-

friendly alternative to the court system.

The Tribunal is required to provide mechanisms that are ‘fair, economical, informal and quick’ for

the purposes of inquiring into, conciliating and reviewing complaints.

About this reportThis report is a record of activities during the 2015-16 fi nancial year [1 July 2015 to 30 June 2016].

This report is prepared in accordance with s 67 of the Superannuation (Resolution of Complaints) Act

1993 and the Requirements for Annual Reports, issued by the Department of the Prime Minister and

Cabinet and approved by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit under ss 63(2) and 70(2)

of the Public Service Act 1999.

The focus of this reporting year, for corporate initiatives and outputs, was on positioning the

Tribunal to best meet its statutory objectives in the resolution of written complaints.

All data in this report was correct at time of reporting. Minor discrepancies between this and

previous annual reports refl ect the outcome of a review of some data and reporting frameworks.

Many of the charts and tables in this report use percentages. Some percentages have been

rounded to the nearest whole number. Because of this, the sum of the percentages in a chart or

table might not add up to 100%.

Contacting the TribunalWho: Senior Manager Complaints Resolution

Visit: Level 7, 120 Collins Street, Melbourne, Victoria

Write to: Locked Bag 3060, Melbourne, VIC 3001

Phone: 1300 884 114 (toll free)

Fax: 03 8635 5588

Website: www.sct.gov.au

Non-English speakersCall the Translating and Interpreting Service on 131 450 and ask them to call the Tribunal.

Please direct inquiries about this report, or the information in it, to:

Locked Bag 3060

Melbourne, VIC 3001

Phone: 1300 884 114

Fax: 03 8635 5588

Email: [email protected]

The Superannuation Complaints Tribunal Annual Report 2015-16 is available on our

website: www.sct.gov.au

II SUPERANNUATION COMPLAINTS TRIBUNAL ANNUAL REPORT 2015–2016

Letter of transmittal I

CHAPTER ONE: CHAIRPERSON’S REVIEW 1

Responding to increased consumer demand 2

2015-16 at a glance 4

Vision, Mission and Values 5

CHAPTER TWO: WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO 7

Role and functions 8

Lifecycle of a complaint 15

Organisation and structure 16

Human Resources 17

Managing complaints 21

Resolving complaints by conciliation 24

National operations 28

Relationships 29

Referral of complaints 30

The responsible Minister 30

CHAPTER THREE: REPORT ON PERFORMANCE 31

Performance summary 32

Inquiries 33

Trends 37

Jurisdiction 38

Conciliation 41

Review 42

CHAPTER FOUR: MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY 43

Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson 44

Part Time Tribunal members 45

Corporate Governance 46

External scrutiny 48

CONTENTS

III

APPENDICES 53

APPENDIX 1: Financial statement 54

APPENDIX 2: Memorandum of understanding with ASIC 55

APPENDIX 3: Service charter 68

APPENDIX 4: Chairperson’s guidelines and procedural rules 60

APPENDIX 5: Conciliation attendance guidelines 64

APPENDIX 6: Delegations 66

APPENDIX 7: External scrutiny 69

REFERENCES 71

Glossary 72

Compliance index 73

Index 74

List of tables and fi gures 78

IV SUPERANNUATION COMPLAINTS TRIBUNAL ANNUAL REPORT 2015–2016

CHAPTER ONE

CHAIRPERSON’SREVIEW2 RESPONDING TO INCREASED CONSUMER DEMAND4 2015-16 AT A GLANCE5 VISION, MISSION AND VALUES

1

“Our work as a specialist, independent dispute resolution body

maintains consumer confi dence in the superannuation system.”

RESPONDING TO INCREASED CONSUMER DEMAND

While it was a challenging year for the Tribunal, our performance results remained strong.The number of complaints fi nalised, resolved

or withdrawn during the year was 2,252, with

677 heard at conciliation and 173 determined at

review.

The Tribunal received 2,368 complaints during

the year with a complainant assessed value

of $109 million, with 833 or 35.2% outside the

Tribunal’s jurisdiction. Of these, 538 were from

complainants who had not fi rst contacted their

fund or provider.

As a result, the Tribunal continued to direct

a higher proportion of its time to consumer

education about trustee complaint procedures,

together with the introduction of enquiry

procedures.

Inquiries from the community for information

increased signifi cantly. Telephone inquiries

increased to almost 16,000. We also analysed

email inquiries for information to further

understand the issues driving higher consumer

engagement levels and introduced supporting

factsheets for consumers.

I was honoured to lead and guide the

Superannuation Complaints Tribunal through

the 2015-16 fi nancial year – my fi rst full

reporting year as Chairperson.

The 2015-16 year proved to be a pivotal one for the Tribunal.Australia’s compulsory superannuation

system plays an increasingly crucial role in

our economy and our community, especially

as the population ages and relies more on its

accumulated savings.

We are a specialist, independent dispute

resolution body. Our work, therefore, plays a

fundamental part in maintaining consumer

confi dence in the superannuation system.

Superannuation savings are often a person’s

largest asset, particularly as they near

retirement. The majority of consumers are

currently in the accumulation phase, focused

on saving for retirement. Over the coming years

there will be an increasing number of people

approaching retirement who engage with their

superannuation. A key focus for the tribunal

is to continue resolving the complaints of

today, while positioning our capabilities for the

complaints of future years.

2 SUPERANNUATION COMPLAINTS TRIBUNAL ANNUAL REPORT 2015–2016

The Tribunal made changes to its structure during 2015-16.

As a result of budget reduction, the Tribunal

reviewed its operations and conducted a

restructure that reduced overall staff numbers.

The introduction of process improvements

increased effi ciency throughout the year,

minimising the impact of the budget reduction

on complaint resolution. Process improvements

included digital telephony, establishment of

an enquiries process and development of

consumer fact sheets. Effi ciency gains have

resulted in the average number of complaints

fi nalised per member of staff rising to 70.4

compared with the fi ve year average of 60.4.

As community engagement and product

complexity are only likely to increase over time,

a more sustainable average will be needed.

We continued to strive toward our objective of

fair, economical, informal and quick outcomes

for complainants through the process of

inquiry, jurisdiction, investigation, conciliation

and review. I would like to thank our staff and

tribunal members for their continuing efforts

and dedication, and the Advisory Council for

their support during the year.

In this year’s report, we’ve highlighted our

achievements for the period and the role of the

Complaints Resolution team which is central

to effective case management. Our Senior

Thank you to our Advisory Council, Tribunal members and staff.During 2015-16, Mark Cerché, Dr Brendan French and Jim Minto completed their service on the Tribunal’s Advisory Council, while Michaela Anderson, Brian Lacey and Paul Trigg completed their terms on the Tribunal.

Complaints Analysts

steward complaints

through the Tribunal,

end-to-end.

Our Conciliators also advance

our mission of ensuring accessible,

timely and fair resolution of

complaints. Over 50% of all complaints

(within jurisdiction) are heard at conciliation,

which is a free and impartial forum where legal

representation is not required.

The Tribunal is committed to meeting the

community’s growing need for superannuation

dispute resolution services.

While an upward trend in inquiries and

insurance complaints will challenge us, the

announcement of additional funding in the

2016/17 Budget will help the Tribunal increase

operational resources to resolve complaints

and continue to improve our systems and

process in future periods. In doing so, we’ll

continue to play our part in maintaining

consumer confi dence in the superannuation

system.

Helen DavisChairperson

3CHAPTER ONE CHAIRPERSON’S REVIEW

Down 18%

2,368Total complaints received

See page 32For the complete 2015-16 performance data, refer to Chapter 3.

2015-16AT A GLANCE

Down 12%

2,252Total complaints fi nalised

Down 22%

32Total Tribunal staff

$5.238mTotal ASIC expenditure for Tribunal

Down 12%

173Total complaints heard at review

677Total complaints heard at conciliation

Down 11%

Down 40%

23,634Inquiries received

Up 107%


VisionA community better informed about superannuation.

MissionWorking with the Australian community to ensure accessible, timely and fair resolution of superannuation complaints.

ValuesRespectWe value people – their diversity, knowledge, skill and experience.

We demonstrate trust and empathy in our relationships with others.

FairnessWe act with impartiality and objectivity, while recognising individual needs and

the parameters of legislation.

We demonstrate integrity, ethical behavior and confi dentiality at all times.

AccountabilityWe are transparent, responsive and timely in our work.

We focus on the delivery of quality outcomes.

CommunicationWe are open, accessible and honest in our communications.

We actively listen and seek information to gain a complete understanding.

ProfessionalismWe support personal and professional development.

We implement best practice.

We demonstrate competency and effi ciency through our work.

5CHAPTER ONE CHAIRPERSON’S REVIEW

CHAPTER TWO

WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO8 ROLE AND FUNCTIONS15 LIFECYCLE OF A COMPLAINT16 ORGANISATION AND STRUCTURE17 HUMAN RESOURCES21 MANAGING COMPLAINTS24 RESOLVING COMPLAINTS BY CONCILIATION28 NATIONAL OPERATIONS29 RELATIONSHIPS30 REFERRAL OF COMPLAINTS30 THE RESPONSIBLE MINISTER

7

ROLE AND FUNCTIONS

RoleThe Tribunal is an independent statutory dispute resolution body that deals with superannuation-

related complaints. It offers a free, user-friendly alternative to the court system.

Over a given year, the Tribunal deals with a diverse range of complaints relating to the decisions and conduct of:

Superannuation trustees

Insurers

Retirement savings account (RSA) providers

Superannuation providers

AND OTHER RELEVANT DECISION-MAKERS IN RELATION TO:

Regulated superannuation funds

Approved deposit funds

Life policy funds

Annuity policies

RSAs

Exempt public sector superannuation schemes that have sought

the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

The Tribunal does not, however, have unlimited

jurisdiction to deal with all superannuation-

related grievances. Very stringent jurisdictional

and standing provisions have been built into the

Superannuation (Resolution of Complaints) Act 1993

(the SRC Act).


PowersThe Tribunal is empowered under the SRC Act to require decision-makers to provide relevant

documentation and information to enable it to inquire into complaints. The Tribunal can also treat

complaints as withdrawn if, for example, it considers:

The complaint is misconceived, lacking in substance, trivial or

vexatious

or, the subject matter has been or could be more effectively

dealt with by another statutory authority or has already been

dealt with by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal may also require the parties to attend a conciliation conference to try to settle the

complaint. If this is unsuccessful, and the complaint is not withdrawn, the complaint proceeds to

review where the Tribunal has power to implement a range of remedies.

Depending on the circumstances of the complaint, the Tribunal may:

affi rm a decision

remit a complaint to the trustee, insurer,

RSA provider or other decision-maker

for reconsideration of its decision in

accordance with the directions of the

Tribunal

vary a decision

set aside a decision and substitute its own

decision

set aside the whole or part, or vary the

terms of a policy/RSA as it applies to a

complainant.

Affi rm means to uphold or support.

Remit means to forward or redirect.

Vary means adjust, modify or change.

Substitute means to use in its place or replace.

If the Tribunal is satisfi ed that a decision in relation to a complainant operated fairly and reasonably

in the circumstance, then the Tribunal must affi rm that decision.

The Tribunal may conclude that the decision or action complained of was unfair or unreasonable to

the complainant. In this situation, when making its determination, the Tribunal:

must comply with the law, the governing rules of the fund, the terms of the insurance contract

or the terms and conditions of the RSA (as relevant)

may only exercise its powers for the purpose of placing the complainant, as nearly as

practicable, in such a position that the unfairness or unreasonableness no longer exists.

The Tribunal can determine that a complainant’s situation be restored.

9CHAPTER TWO WHO WE ARE AND WHAT WE DO

JurisdictionThe table below shows complaints that are within jurisdiction for the Tribunal.

Complaints about the decisions and conduct of:

Regulated superannuation funds (other than a self-managed

superannuation fund (SMSF)) and approved deposit funds (ADF).

People acting on behalf of the trustee

Insurers in relation to insurance benefi ts provided under

superannuation funds.

Life companies as providers of immediate and deferred annuities

(annuity policies).

People acting on behalf of the life company.

Providers of retirement savings accounts (RSA provider).

People acting on behalf of the RSA provider and the decisions of

insurers in relation to insurance benefi ts where the premiums

are paid from the RSA

EXAMPLES OF COMPLAINTS:

A belief that a death benefi t was paid or may be paid to the wrong

person or people

An unreasonable delay in a payment

A miscalculation of a benefi t, payment, or commutation

A refusal to approve a claim for a disability benefi t

Misrepresentation about the terms and conditions of a life or

annuity policy

Errors in annual statements

Error in information provided by a superannuation provider to the

ATO for the purposes of the superannuation surcharge, member

contributions statements or increased contributions tax on high

income earners

A refusal by an insurer to approve a claim for a disability benefi t

where the insurance premium is paid from the RSA.

A superannuation provider’s conduct in administering the

splitting of a superannuation payment between spouses in

accordance with a binding agreement or Family Court Order

under the family law legislation.

The Tribunal’s jurisdiction is not limited by dollar considerations.


A complaint can be made to the Tribunal that a decision or conduct was unfair or unreasonable in

its practical outcome or consequence. While the Tribunal hears complaints about a wide range of

decisions made by different superannuation entities, it has no jurisdiction to deal with the following

complaints:

Process and scope

Where the complainant has not, before coming

to the Tribunal, fi rst lodged a complaint

with the fund or RSA provider via its internal

complaints resolution arrangements

under s 101 of the Superannuation Industry

(Supervision) Act 1993 (the SIS Act) or s 47 of

the Retirement Savings Accounts Act 1997

(the RSA Act) (as relevant) or, with respect

to complaints in relation to another relevant

decision-maker, has not made all reasonable

efforts to have the complaint resolved by that

decision maker – s 19 of the SRC Act.

HASN’T FIRST BEEN DEALT WITH BY THE FUND

Where the subject matter of the complaint is

currently the subject of court proceedings –

s 20 of the SRC Act.

BEFORE A COURT

Where other statutory standing requirements

set by the SRC Act have not been met by the

complainant(s).

DOESN’T MEET SRC ACT REQUIREMENTS

Where it is about ‘management of the fund as

a whole’ – ss 14(6), 15F(4) or 15J(4) of the SRC

Act.

NOT SPECIFIC TO THE COMPLAINANT

Entity/product type

Are related to self-managed superannuation

funds (SMSFs). SMSFs are regulated by the

Australian Taxation Offi ce (ATO) – s 5 of the

SRC Act.

RELATES TO SMSFS

Are related to exempt public sector

superannuation schemes which are not taken

to be ‘regulated’ by s 4A of the SRC Act, or

prior to being taken to be regulated, or in

relation to which a State or Territory law

has not expressly conferred functions on the

Tribunal for s 12(2) of the SRC Act.

RELATES TO SOME UNREGULATED PUBLIC SECTOR SCHEMES


Entity/product type

CONTINUEDAre about fi nancial advisers who are not acting

as agents of a superannuation provider.

RELATES TO FINANCIAL ADVISERS

Are about decisions made by decision-makers

who are not specifi cally caught by the SRC Act

(for example, employers).

RELATES TO THOSE NOT IN SRC ACT

Expired benefit

Total and permanent disability (TPD)

complaints not made within the time limits set

in ss 14(6A)-(6D), 15F(5)-(8) or 15J(F)-(8) of the

SRC Act.

TIME LIMITS EXPIRED

In relation to the payment of death benefi ts not

made by persons who do not have an ‘interest

in the benefi t’ or not made by such a person

within the prescribed time limit – ss 14(4) and

15(2), 15B(3) and 15C(2), 15F(3) and 15G(2), or

15J(3) and 15K(2) of the SRC Act.

NO INTEREST OR TIME LIMITS HAVE EXPIRED

Other

Are about decisions of trustees of regulated

superannuation funds and approved deposit

funds made before the fund was regulated.

(See the judgment of Merkel J in Briffa & Ors v

Hay (1997) 147 ALR 226).

DECISIONS MADE BEFORE THE FUND WAS REGULATED

Are ‘excluded complaints’ and complaints

concerning ‘excluded subject matter’ as

declared in the SRC Regulations. (No

complaints or subject matter have been

declared as excluded as at 30 June 2016)

EXCLUDED COMPLAINTS

Each year, the Tribunal receives many complaints outside its jurisdictionoutside its jurisdiction. Of those complainants, 65%65% had not contacted their fund. About 10%10% were member enquiries.


ObjectivesOur Act requires the Tribunal to provide mechanisms for conciliation and review of complaints that

are fair, economical, informal and quick.

These objectives are also part of the Tribunal’s mission statement.

To achieve them, the Tribunal manages complaints through three stages:

1INQUIRY (INVESTIGATION)

Enquires into a complaint by obtaining documents and information

so that it can decide jurisdiction, standing, grounds and

representation.

2CONCILIATION

Tries to resolve complaints through conciliation, which aims to

reach a settlement where all parties agree.

3REVIEW

Reviews the complaint if conciliation is unsuccessful (and the

complaint has not been withdrawn). This means that the Tribunal

must determine the outcome of the complaint.

Conciliation is a meetingmeeting between parties to definedefine the issues and resolveresolve the dispute. It is run by an experienced, independent conciliatorconciliator.

FAIR ECONOMICAL INFORMAL QUICK


The SRC Act was amended once during the reporting period. Section 4C was introduced in September 2015 to provide for the external review of decisions in relation to benefi ts payable to those covered under the Australian Defence Force Cover Act 2015 (ADF Cover). For the purpose of the SRC Act an ADF Cover scheme will be treated as if it were a regulated super fund, which means that members will be able to bring their complaints to the Tribunal.

DelegationPursuant to s 59(1) of the SRC Act, the Tribunal’s inquiry and conciliation

functions are exercisable on behalf of the Tribunal by the Chairperson, Deputy

Chairperson and/or by members of the Tribunal staff who have been so

authorised by the Chairperson.

The Tribunal’s review powers rest directly in the Tribunal itself as constituted for

review and may not be delegated.

SRC Act Amendments


Complaint

Investigation

Conciliation

Review and Determination

Appeal

LIFECYCLE OF A COMPLAINT

MEMBER SUPER FUND

Dissatisfi ed with the fund’s

response

No response from fund within

90 days

Satisfi ed with the fund’s

response

Member lodges complaint

with Tribunal

Member lodges complaint with Tribunal

Member makes complaint

to fund

Tribunal assesses jurisdiction

Information requested from fund/member

Within Tribunal jurisdiction

Analysis of complaint

Other parties joined to complaint

Outside of Tribunal jurisdiction

Complaint withdrawn by Tribunal

Submissions requested/exchanged

Tribunal Review Meeting

(based on papers)

Determination issued

Attempt to settle by conciliation

Unsuccessful Successful

COMPLAINT FINALISED

SCT

SCT

TRIBUNAL

Appeal to Federal Court

Complaint withdrawn by Tribunal


Avg. Complaints per staff

ReviewSupportOffi cers

Senior Conciliators

Senior Complaints Analysts

Support offi cer, Complaints Resolution

ORGANISATION AND STRUCTURE

REVIEW HEARINGS

COMPLAINTS RESOLUTION

BUSINESSSERVICES

COMMUN-ICATIONS

LEGAL

SCT Part-time Members

Deputy Chair

Senior Manager

Complaints Resolution

LegalCounsel

ManagerBusinessServices

ManagerCommun-ications

ManagerComplaintsResolution

ManagerComplaintsResolution

Senior Conciliators

Senior Complaints Analysts

Support offi cer, Complaints Resolution

Senior Jurisdiction Analysts Support Services Offi cers

Lawyer

SCT Chairperson Executive Assistant

5.238Budget ($million)

32Staff numbers

18 14Staff gender

6Part-time

26Full-time20

16 70.4

5.919Budget ($million)

39Staff numbers Staff gender

4Part-time

35Full-time20

15 60.4Avg. Complaints per staff

23 16(5yr Average)

Organisational chart as at 30 June 2016


HUMAN RESOURCES

Review of organisation structure During the period, the Tribunal reviewed and

revised the structure of its operations. The

purpose of the restructure was to address a

reduced operating budget and prioritising the

business of resolving complaints.

The Business Support function within the

Tribunal provided executive administration,

support services, information communications

technology and public relations and was

separate to the core function of the Tribunal,

which is the inquiry, conciliation, review

and general stewardship of superannuation

complaints. As a result of the review the

business support function was disbanded with

support services moved to the complaints

resolution team and two roles created to focus

on business improvements and communication.

During the year there were:

12 employee exits

5 employee hires.

Overall staff numbers during the year were

reduced from 39 to 32, an 18% change in

resourcing. (See Table 2.2).

The purpose of the restructure was to:

avoid unnecessary duplication of resources,

given the Tribunal’s SLA with ASIC

maximise available budget for complaints

resolution

re-position operations for the future.

Performance managementThe Tribunal continues to operate within a

performance management framework for its

staff.

This framework is designed to help employees

perform, develop and achieve workplace

results through a process of clear and ongoing

communication between managers and staff.

Managers also monitor workfl ow and provide

ongoing feedback and guidance to their teams.

Career development and trainingOver the period, the Tribunal continued to

invest in essential learning and development

opportunities for staff. This investment allows

staff to develop their capabilities so the

Tribunal can better deliver its core services.


The Tribunal focuses its development on: 1

SPECIALIST KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS in superannuation,

conciliation, mediation, handling unreasonable complainant

behavior, strategic thinking, leadership, communication,

administration, information and technology, and record keeping.

2MANDATORY TRAINING in ethics, fraud awareness, appropriate

handling of sensitive information and understanding of core

organisational behaviours and values.

3STAFF PERSONAL PERFORMANCE PLAN ACTIVITIES aligned to

its core function. This includes attendance at courses, seminars

and conferences. Staff also undertake higher duties, special

project work and representation on working groups.

Work health and safetyThe Tribunal is committed to a safe and healthy workplace for all employees, contractors,

stakeholders and visitors. During the period, there were no work-related medical incidents causing

injury and no compensation claims were made in the reporting year.

Staff numbersThe following tables detail the Tribunal’s staff numbers for 2015-2016 with 2014-2015 numbers in

brackets. All Tribunal staff are employed under the ASIC Enterprise Agreement 2016-2019.

The Tribunal has no staff who identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander. All Tribunal employees

were located in Melbourne during the period.

During the year we introduced regular technical training sessions focused on key themes being observed by the Tribunal.


Table 2.1Tribunal staff (as at 30 June 2016)

Non - Ongoing Ongoing

Full Time Part Time Full Time Part Time

Tota

l

Grade F M F M F M F M

Chair 1 1

Deputy

Chair1 1

EXECUTIVE

LEVEL 2 1 1 1 3

EXECUTIVE

LEVEL 1 2 1 1 4

ASIC 4 7 8 1 1 17

ASIC 3 1 1 2 4

ASIC 2 1 1 2

Grand total2

(4)0 0 0

12

(15)

12

(16)

4

(4)

2

(0)

32

(39)

Table 2.2Workforce planning, retention and turnover during reporting period

Non - Ongoing OngoingTotal

F M F M

Hires

EXECUTIVE LEVEL 2

EXECUTIVE LEVEL 1 1 1

ASIC 4 1

ASIC 3

ASIC 2 1 1 5 (5)

Turnover*

EXECUTIVE LEVEL 2 1

EXECUTIVE LEVEL 1 2

ASIC 4 2 2

ASIC 3 1 2 1

ASIC 2 1 12 (7)

* As at 30 June 2015, excludes one contractor


Salary and performance payThe following tables detail the salary and performance pay for Senior Executive Service (SES)* and

non-SES staff related to the Tribunal during the period.

Table 2.3Salary range (2015-16 by classification)

Grade Minimum Maximum

ASIC 2 $50,307 $60,187

ASIC 3 $64,124 $73,504

ASIC 4 $76,730 $86,863

Executive Level 1 $100,555 $116,313

Executive Level 2 $113,911 $159,618

Table 2.4 Performance pay (2015-16 by classification)

Classifi cation

Num

ber

of

reci

pien

ts

Aggr

egat

e

Min

imum

Max

imum

Aver

age

ASIC 4 19 $66,373 $558 $12,199 $3,493

Executive Level 7 $42,088 $2,190 $12,240 $6,013

Total 26 $108,461

*No SES staff were employed at the Tribunal during the period.

Enterprise AgreementUnder s 62(1) of the SRC Act, all Tribunal staff are employed under the Public Service Act 1999. All

Tribunal staff are employed under the ASIC Enterprise Agreement 2016-2019. Information on the

enterprise agreement and performance pay arrangements are publicly available.

The Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson are appointed by the Governor-General and remunerated

in accordance with determinations made under the Remuneration Tribunal Act 1973 (the

Remuneration Act).

Part-time members of the Tribunal are appointed by the responsible Minister and are also

remunerated in accordance with determinations made under the Remuneration Act.


MANAGING COMPLAINTS

The Tribunal has put in place a comprehensive system for complaints handling. The system

ensures all complaints are managed carefully from the moment they are lodged with the Tribunal,

right through to their fi nalisation, with a focus on achieving resolution as early as possible. The

Senior Complaints Analyst plays a key role in the management of complaints.

Specialist end-to-end carriage of complaintsThe Tribunal’s Senior Complaints Analysts are highly knowledgeable and experienced case

specialists. Their day-to-day work effectively helps the Tribunal turn its objectives (being fair,

economical, informal and quick) into operational practice.

The Analysts are accountable for:

Managing the end-to-end carriage of a complaint to resolution

Analysing, assessing and resolving complaints

Preparing detailed written reports about complaints

Communicating with all parties to a complaint - complainants, trustees and insurers

Preparing fi les of complaints not resolved at conciliation for formal review

Identifying system and process improvements for the Tribunal.

Seeing cases through to resolution Formal written complaints are fi rst assessed by a Senior Jurisdiction Analyst who determines if the

complaint can be assessed by the Tribunal.

Complaints within jurisdiction are then allocated to a Senior Complaints Analyst who then seeks

all relevant information in order to assist with the investigation of the complaint. The Senior

Complaints Analyst investigates the case and prepares recommendations as to the best course of

action for a resolution.

A source of confidence for all stakeholdersThrough their thorough work over the lifecycle of a complaint, the Senior Complaints Analysts are often a source of considerable confi dence to all stakeholders.

The Tribunal often receives positive feedback about the Analysts, notably about their professionalism and specialist skills. This is not unusual given the ongoing role an Analyst can play in handling a case over the period of investigation.


Graham SENIOR COMPLAINTS ANALYST

“My experience comes from 30+ years in the industry. I worked at a

superannuation provider for more than 19 years in various roles across customer

service, superannuation, compliance, complaints for the CEO’s offi ce, as well

as matters that came from the Tribunal or other external dispute bodies. I have

been at the Tribunal now for more than 10 years.

Complexity of complaints is increasing

32% of complaints within jurisdiction related to death benefits.

“The number of complaints has been fairly

similar each year, however we are seeing an

increase in their complexity. We get a fairly high

number of complaints about the distribution

of Death Benefi ts. During my time at the

Tribunal there’s been a shift in their complexity

due to modern living arrangements, de-facto

relationships and complex family structures. I

think people often misunderstand the validity

of death benefi t nominations and may not

appreciate the diffi culties of determining who is

dependent on the deceased or interdependent.

Often it is adult children objecting because a

death benefi t has gone to the de facto. There’s

certainly an opportunity for more education.

“An important part of the Senior Complaints

Analyst role is to actively engage with all

parties to assist with progressing complaints

to a resolution. Most often the complainant

or joined party (for death benefi t distribution

complaint) are the main parties who require

assistance as they are generally unfamiliar

with the Tribunal’s powers, processes or the

complexities of superannuation.

Explaining the complexities“Complainants often assume superannuation

death benefi ts form part of a deceased’s estate.

My role is to explain how benefi ts are paid

under the Fund Rules and superannuation

legislation. The information can be a surprise

but they appreciate our engagement as it

can assist with resolving the complaint much

sooner.

For a death benefits fact sheet visit sct.gov.au/downloads

“Also, complainants generally assume that if

they receive disability support or have had a

workcover claim accepted, their TPD claim

should be admitted and the benefi t paid. My

role is to inform the party of the requirements

and tests involved under the Fund Rules or

the insurance policy. The resolution process

is greatly assisted when they have a better

understanding of these requirements.

For a disability fact sheet visit sct.gov.au/downloads


Tips for consumers“The most important information I could give would be to read your statements from your superannuation fund. Keep track of your superannuation and seek professional fi nancial advice if you’re close to retirement.”

“It is satisfying to receive regular, appreciative

feedback during the entire process even when

a complaint isn’t resolved to a complainant’s

satisfaction. Most people appreciate the service

we provide in assisting them with their complaint and

educating them about complex matters in a way they can

understand. Particularly for TPD-related complaints which can

be during a traumatic time in their lives.”

Making a difference by resolving complaints“While we act independently, it is always satisfying when a matter is resolved.

I’m motivated each day to investigate complaints and to see if we can resolve

them. The staff at the Tribunal are great, that makes a big difference. Plus, there is a

variety of complaint types and legislation that I enjoy and fi nd intellectually stimulating.”

2015-16 highlights Meeting key performance indicators for complaints resolved

Resolving complaints early, before conciliation or review

Reaching 10 years at the Tribunal.

41.5% of complaints within jurisdiction were resolved by Senior Complaints Analysts before the need for conciliation or review.


RESOLVING COMPLAINTS BY CONCILIATION

To keep conciliation user-friendly, legal

representation is not required but it can be

requested. Complainants might also wish to

be supported through the process with a family

member or friend.

Conciliators often provide educative information

to all parties to make the process successful.

Clarifying disputes, narrowing the issuesBefore a conference occurs, the conciliator

contacts each party and introduces themselves.

They also ask the parties involved if they

have any concerns or questions about the

conciliation process.

Group sessions are usually scheduled for three

hours and are held by teleconference. The

conciliator introduces the parties, explains their

role and outlines the guidelines.

The conciliator then summarises the issue or

issues in dispute before inviting each party to

state their position, reason/s for attending and

outcome sought – without interruption.

A key step is for the conciliator to then conduct

a joint session. This lets the parties explore

the issues together and ask questions of each

other to clarify matters.

The conciliator then talks privately with all

parties. The parties may raise any concerns

or matters they did not fully understand and

provide any explanations or information they

wish to give in private.

Conciliation is a meeting of the parties

involved that is organised by the Tribunal to

help the parties reach a solution. Importantly,

conciliation is informal and accessible to

increase the likelihood of a mutually agreeable

outcome.

Experienced Senior ConciliatorsDuring the year, the Tribunal employed two full

time conciliators and one part time conciliator.

The Tribunal’s conciliators are experienced

senior offi cers who are independent of the

parties involved.

Their role is to:

Conduct the proceedings

Draw attention to certain aspects of a

complaint, ask questions of the parties and

assist them in fi nding a resolution; but

– is not an advocate for any party

– does not decide the merits of the case

– does not mediate or offer a solution

Draft agreements where required.

Ensuring fairnessThe Tribunal’s conciliators are vigilant

in remaining neutral. Their impartiality,

independence and professional conduct

ensures fair treatment for all parties and adds

to the integrity of the process.

50.5% of all complaints within jurisdiction go to conciliation

51.4%of cases in conciliation were settled.


An outcome usually occurs when parties cooperate and share a desire to settle. Outcomes may be:

a full settlement in favour of the complainant

a compromise

a withdrawal of the complaint

a deferred outcome, such as adjourning for more information, or

no settlement is reached and the complaint may proceed to a Review Meeting.


Mila SENIOR CONCILIATOR

“I have a background in social research and worked as a designer and mediator

in the building industry. Later I moved into the Government sector. I hold a formal

qualifi cation in mediation. I started with the Tribunal as an Analyst eight years ago,

having also worked extensively in the super industry and at the trustee level.”

A focus on outcomes“When I get into a conference, I immediately

shift into a mental space where I’m trying to

get an outcome. The potential for a positive

outcome, a satisfi ed complainant and an

engaged trustee and insurer, is what keeps

me motivated. We’re supported in our roles by

managers and colleagues to get the results.

This trust and fl exibility helps a lot as we also

work long hours across three time zones.”

Growth in complex cases and workload“We have a high workload. The increased

complexity of some complaints, such as

death benefi ts, often mean a larger number

of attendees at conferences. This can

increase a conciliator’s workload and make

it more challenging for all parties to reach a

settlement.”

Being the ‘end point’ of a complaint“What’s satisfying is being an end point for

people who have been through a protracted

system. I like engaging with other entities,

helping people understand the process and

giving information that allows them to ‘let go’

and fi nd a solution.”

2015-16 highlights Exploring ways to reduce the resolution time of complaints at conciliation

Receiving positive comments from parties at the end of conciliation

Successfully managing a large number of complaints over the year.


Adding value by achieving clarity“Conciliation is very fulfi lling. It is always rewarding to achieve an

outcome for parties. It is important to remember that for many people

superannuation can be their most signifi cant asset. Conciliation assists parties

to re-establish lines of communication and narrow the issues in dispute. This

might lead to a negotiated agreement and sometimes results in a claim being paid in

full. Informing a complainant, particularly an unwell complainant in disability matters,

that their claim is being paid is incredibly satisfying.”

Resolving a variety of complaints“The Tribunal receives complainants that touch on so many different areas of law. This makes

conciliation very interesting. In a week you might have a variety of complaints that deal with

aspects of tax law, insurance law, superannuation law, family law, property law, succession law or

even criminal law.”

Helping parties reach their own outcome“I think the most enjoyable part of being a conciliator is assisting people to reach a resolution

through their own efforts. This has a far more positive impact on people than an outcome imposed

by a determination.”

Priya SENIOR CONCILIATOR

“I am trained as a lawyer and mediator and have

worked at the Tribunal for 8 years.”

2015-16 highlights Providing insights for the Chairperson to share with industry

Receiving feedback that we’ve made a difference

Tailoring our communication to better prepare parties for conciliation.

Tips for complainants“The most important educative information I could give would be to understand Negotiation 101. For an unrepresented complainant, know the basics about offers, counter offers and commercial offers.”


NATIONAL OPERATIONSThe Tribunal is located at Level 7, 120 Collins Street in Melbourne, Victoria.

It has discretionary powers under ss 29 and 35 of the SRC Act and Rule 5 of the

Chairperson’s Guidelines and Procedural Rules (see Appendix 4) to decide its mode

of service delivery.

The Tribunal may determine its conciliations and reviews by telephone, video

conferencing or by ‘any means of communication’.

Tips for complainants“When it comes to insurance matters, be prepared. If it’s a policy matter, use the appropriate policy terms and defi nitions in your arguments. Always avoid personal comments about the other party. It’s unhelpful and reduces your bargaining position. Also, set aside enough time for conciliation – it’s your complaint, so be responsible for the time set aside for you. We know a lot of people go through conciliation for the fi rst time too, so call beforehand if you have any questions or concerns.”


RELATIONSHIPS

Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC)The Tribunal has a relationship with ASIC, which began

on 1 July 1998. Under section 62(2) of the SRC Act, ASIC

provides the staff and facilities as necessary or desirable

to enable the Tribunal to perform its functions.

Since 6 May 1999 (see Appendix 2), the Tribunal and

ASIC work under a non-legally binding memorandum of

understanding (MOU).

The MOU satisfi es relevant statutory provisions and

recognises each body’s independence.

In addition, the Tribunal and ASIC observe a mutual,

non-legally binding, service level agreement (SLA). The

SLA outlines each agency’s responsibilities in relation to

information technology, learning and development, fi nance,

human resource management/payroll and offi ce services.

Under the SRC Act, ASIC provides the Tribunal with

resources and budget to function. Procurements are made

in accordance with the Commonwealth Procurement Rules

(2014).

Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA)APRA oversees banks, credit unions, building societies,

general insurance and reinsurance companies, life

insurance, private health insurance, friendly societies and

most of the superannuation industry.

The regulator also collects an annual levy on

superannuation entities, under the Financial Institutions

Supervisory Levies Collection Act 1998, which is paid into

consolidated revenue.

The Tribunal’s operating costs are appropriated by

Parliament as part of the ASIC appropriations described

above.

ASIC provides the Tribunal with the resources and budget to function.

The Tribunal is funded by industry.

APRA collects a levy from the industry.

The Tribunal is funded as part of the appropriations for ASIC.


REFERRAL OF COMPLAINTS

The Tribunal must provide ASIC and/or APRA

with certain details of complaints pursuant to

ss 64, 64A, 65 and 31(2) of the SRC Act.

ContraventionsUnder our Act, the Tribunal’s Chairperson must

report details about contraventions of any:

Law

Governing rules of a superannuation fund

Terms and conditions of an annuity policy,

life policy or RSA.

The Chairperson must give the particulars to

ASIC and/or APRA on becoming aware there

may be a contravention.

This reporting year 13 contraventions were

reported to ASIC or APRA.

THE RESPONSIBLE MINISTER

The responsible Minister has certain statutory powers under our Act. They are mostly concerned

with various appointment and administrative matters concerning the Chairperson, Deputy

Chairperson and members. The minister has no statutory powers of direction over the Tribunal in

the exercise of its s 12 functions.

As at 30 June 2016, the Tribunal’s portfolio Minister was the then Minister for Small Business and

Assistant Treasurer, the Hon. Kelly O’Dwyer MP.

The Tribunal’s enabling Act, the SRC Act, is administered by the Department of the Treasury.

.

DeterminationsUnder s 65 of the SRC Act, the Chairperson

must report details of any refusals or failures

to give effect to a determination made by the

Tribunal.

On becoming aware that a party to a complaint

has failed or refused to give effect to a

determination, the Chairperson must give

particulars to ASIC and/or APRA.

This reporting year one reportable failure or

refusal to give effect to a determination was

reported.

SettlementsThe Tribunal has discretionary power to give

details of a conciliation settlement to the

‘regulator’ if it thinks the settlement may

require investigation. ‘Regulator’ is defi ned

in s 10(1) of the Superannuation Industry

(Supervision) Act 1993 (SIS Act). It may be either

ASIC, APRA, the Commissioner of Taxation or

the Chief Executive of Medicare, as relevant.

This reporting year there were no settlements

requiring investigation.


CHAPTER THREE

REPORT ON PERFORMANCE32 PERFORMANCE SUMMARY33 INQUIRIES37 TRENDS38 JURISDICTION41 CONCILIATION42 REVIEW

31

REV

IEW

PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

2,252 complaints fi nalised, resolved or withdrawn in 2015-16

67,771 website hits

INQ

UIR

Y

2,368complaints received

23,634inquiries received

$109.3million total value of complaints received

15,910

7,724

by phone

by email

616administration

$21.5mtotal value

429death

$55.4mtotal value

295disability

$30.6mtotal value

JURISDICTION CONCILIATION

50.5% of all complaints within jurisdiction go to conciliation

13% of all complaints within jurisdiction determined at review matters determined at review

$29.7mtotal value of complaints determined 173

1,340 complaints within jurisdiction

51.4% cases in conciliation settled

cases heard

677


INQUIRIES

More detailed data now captured for inquiriesIn 2015-16, the Tribunal started to record the number of inquiries made by email in addition to its ongoing record of telephone inquiries. As a result, the number of total inquiries for 2015-16 is signifi cantly higher than past years. The capture of additional data will help the Tribunal better understand community need and further improve its processes.

Number of inquiries has increased

The year in review saw an increase in total inquiries to the Tribunal. There were

23,634 inquiries compared to 11,436 the previous year, an increase of 12,198 or

106.7%.

The difference however, is mostly the result of additional data collection due to

the Tribunal adding inquiries received by email to its reporting.

It should be noted that of the 23,634 inquiries, 15,910 were made by telephone –

which represents in its own right a signifi cant increase of 4,474 inquiries or 39.1%

over the previous year.

A total of 7,724 inquiries to the Tribunal were made by email.

An inquiry is defined as initial contact with the Tribunal to obtain information about the complaints process or a request for further educational information to clarify complaint matters.

33CHAPTER THREE REPORT ON PERFORMANCE

Tribunal educative fact sheetsDuring 2015-16, the Tribunal used insights gained from inquires to develop a series of educative fact sheets for assisting consumers with basic information. Topics include departing Australia Superannuation payments, early release of superannuation and employers not paying super contributions.

Figure 3.1Volume of inquiries received

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

2012-132013-142014-152015-16 2011-12

15,9

10

11,4

36

12,2

49

11,4

41 13,9

01

Inq

uir

ies r

ece

ive

d

7,72

4

326

7,724Email

326Inquiries previously dealt with as complaints*.

* Change introduced February 2016

15,910Telephone

Inquiries received 2015-16.


814

Number of complaints remained stableOver the reporting year, the Tribunal received a total of

2,368 complaints compared to 2,688 the previous year

– a fall of 320 complaints or 11.9%.

This difference, however, is the result of 326

complaints being re-classifi ed for greater accuracy

as inquiries. Over the past fi ve years, the volume of

complaints to the Tribunal has remained relatively

stable.

A complaint is defined as a formal written application about an issue and requesting the Tribunal to commence its resolution process.

Inquiries previously dealt with as complaintsIn February 2016, the Tribunal introduced a new process of recognising and managing initial inquiries distinct

from a complaint, improving the service experience for consumers and assisting with a more effective allocation

of resources to complaint resolution. The change means that some complaints are now recorded as inquiries

because they relate to information requests.

For the review year, the Tribunal responded to 326 inquiries that would have previously been classifi ed as

complaints. As a result, the 2015-16 complaint data shows a corresponding fall in complaints and a rise in

inquiries. The improvement is designed to help the Tribunal reduce its response time for complaints and

information requests alike.

Figure 3.2Volume of written complaints received

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2012-132013-142014-152015-16* 2011-12

2,36

8 2,68

8

2,49

3

2,44

4

2,61

9

Wri

tte

n c

om

pla

ints

re

ceiv

ed

2,368Written complaints2015-16.

989Mail

*Note: 326 complaints re-classifi ed as inquiries.

Lodgment method 2015-16.

482Online Email

– Info inbox

77Fax – Info inbox

6In person


Value of complaintsSuperannuation as a portion of an individual’s wealth is refl ected in the monetary value of complaints received

by the Tribunal.

In 2015-16 the Tribunal received complaints from consumers estimated at more than $109 million with their

fi nal value still to be determined.

The table below shows the total value of complaints received in 2015-16 by complaint type.

Table 3.1Value of complaints received in 2015-16

Total Number of complaints with no dollar valueTotal value of complaints received $109,332,056

Outside jurisdiction $1,686,775 877

Death $55,442,669 117

Disability $30,628,278 98

Administration $21,574,331 323


Top complaints over timeThe Tribunal has conducted analysis on all complaints received (both inside and outside jurisdiction) to

understand the trend over time in complaint type.

Consistent with recent years, the majority of complains received by the Tribunal relate to distribution of death

benefi ts.

More recently the Tribunal has observed an increase in complaints regarding insurance premiums. Of interest,

the number of insurance premium complaints is on par with the number of complaints relating to permanent

disability claims.

Table 3.2Proportion of total complaints in top 10 over time

% of total Complaints 2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

2015-16

Account Balance 9% 5% 6% 5% 5%

Administration - errors 5% 2% 2% 2% 2%

Death Benefi t Distribution 21% 21% 18% 17% 22%

Deduction of insurance premiums 4% 7% 6% 10% 9%

Delay - Transfer of benefi t 5% 4% 5% 4% 3%

Delay - Payment of benefi t 3% 2% 2% 1% 1%

Disclosure of information 3% 3% 2% 3% 3%

Failure to provide information 2% 3% 4% 2% 3%

Fees and Charges 3% 4% 4% 5% 4%

Financial hardship claims 2% 3% 3% 3% 3%

Insurance cover in dispute

(not subject to a claim) 2% 2% 2% 3% 3%

TPD - Declined on medical evidence 3% 3% 4% 5% 4%

TPD - Delay in decision 2% 3% 4% 3% 4%

TTD - Benefi t amount in dispute 2% 2% 3% 3% 4%

Proportion of Total Complaints in ‘top 10’ 73% 64% 66% 66% 66%

Insurance

Admin Complaints

Death

TRENDS


JURISDICTION

There were 1,340 complaints in 2015-16 that fell within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. This represented a decline of

246 complaints being within jurisdiction or 15.5% on 2014-15.

Of the complaints that fell outside of jurisdiction 65% of complainants had not yet complained to their fund.

We also saw complaints where time limits had already expired. This constrains the Tribunal in dealing with the

complaint, as do matters beyond a Trustee’s decision making powers (for example, legislative requirements).

Nature of complaintsOf the 1,340 complaints received within jurisdiction, most continued to fall into three major categories:

administration, death and disability.

The following chart shows the nature of written complaints for the period within jurisdiction (1,340).

1,340Total written complaints2015-16.

Figure 3.3Nature of complaints

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

AdministrationAccount balanceDeduction of insurance premiumsDisclosure of information/MisrepresentationFees and chargesInsurance coverDelayEarly releaseErrorExit feeMisallocated contributionsContributions taxInvestment switch instructionAll other

Death Death benefit distributionOther

Benefit amount in disputeBenefit declined on medical evidenceDelay in making decisionEligibility to make a claim for a benefit

Disability

Other

Number written complaints

70131

44

46414939

2120

13

3830

74

376

53

7799

642134

616

429

295

Total complaints within jurisdiction 2015-16.

616Administration

429Death

295Disability


Nature of complaints in jurisdiction over timeThe following chart shows the nature of complaints within jurisdiction over time. The chart shows a steady

increase in Disability complaints and a fairly stable volume of death benefi t complaints.

Figure 3.4Trend over time in nature of complaints

10

20

30

40

50

60

2014-152013-142012-132011-12 2015-16

Pe

rce

nta

ge

% 55.3%53.2%

46.4%49.2%

45.97%

32.4%30.5%

32.5%28.7%

32.01%

12.3%16.3%

21.1% 22.1% 22.01%

Complaints finalised, resolved or withdrawnThere were 2,252 complaints fi nalised, resolved

or withdrawn during the year – a decrease of 651

complaints or 22.4% on 2014-15 year refl ecting the

Tribunal’s reduction in resources. In addition the

Tribunal resolved fewer complaints at review due to

a reduction in the Tribunal’s part time memberships.

Of these complaints 886 or 39.3% were outside

jurisdiction.

The reduction in complaints compared to the

previous year suggests ongoing education efforts

may have resulted in more matters being raised by

superannuation members as inquiries.

As reported, the volume of inquiries to the Tribunal

increased.

In effect, this has meant additional time spent

meeting public demand for information during the

year with fewer resources than 2014-15.

Of the requests for information, more time was

directed to member education assisting consumers

to understand the trustee complaint procedures. This

redirected time away from complaint resolution.

Also, a lower number of complaints were resolved at

review refl ecting a reduction in availability of Tribunal

members.

Death

Administration

Disability


Figure 3.5Complaints finalised, resolved or withdrawn

Decision affirmed

Decision remitted

Decision varied

Decision set aside

12110

141

23%

30%

39%

8%

Withdrawn by the Tribunal

Withdrawn by the Complainant

Review matters determined

Outside of Jurisdiction

Review mattersdetermined

Table 3.3Data for complaints finalised, resolved or withdrawn

Number of complaints %

Withdrawn by the Tribunal 515 23%

Complainant does not wish to proceed 253

Lacking in substance 140

Misconceived 117

Trivial 3

Can be or has been dealt with by

another statutory authority1

Failed to attend conciliation 1

Withdrawn by complainant 678 30%

Before conciliation conference 300

After conciliation conference 259

After listing for review 8

Without Resolution 111

Review matters determined 173 8%

Decision affi rmed 121

Decision remitted 10

Decision varied 1

Decision set aside 41

Outside of Jurisdiction 886 39%

Total number of complaints closed FY15-16 2252 100%


CONCILIATIONThe Tribunal conciliated 677 cases in 2015-16, a reduction of 80 cases or 10.5% on the previous year. The

percentage of cases settled by conciliation was steady at 51.4%, consistent with 2014-15.

Throughout the year conciliation saw a focus on complaints that related to death benefi t distribution, complaints where TPD claims were denied based on medical evidence and complaints relating to the deduction of insurance premiums.

Table 3.4Conciliation cases 2015-16

* Includes disclosure/

fees and payments sub

categories that were

listed separately in

2014/15.

2015-16 2014-15

Number % Number %

Total complaints heard in conciliation

677 757

% of all complaints received within jurisdiction

50.5% 47.7%

TYPE

Administration 194 28.6% 253* 33.4%

Death 295 43.5% 306 40.4%

Disability 188 27.7% 198 26.2%

OUTCOME

Pending 110 16.2% 40 5.3%

Settled 348 51.4% 389 51.4%

Not settled 219 32.3% 328 43.3%

Figure 3.6Conciliation cases 2015-16 by type

28.6%

27.7%

Administration

Disability

Death

43.5%

Figure 3.7 Conciliation cases 2015-16 by result

16.2%

51.4%

Pending

Settled

Not settled

32.3%

99.2%of conciliation cases held by teleconference, 0.8% other.


REVIEW

During 2015-16, the Tribunal determined 173 matters at review. This decline of 113 cases or 39.5%, refl ects

expiration of terms, timing of appointments and fewer Tribunal members.

Generally, the focus of cases determined at review were fairly evenly spread across Death (34.7%), Disability

(34.7%) and Administration (30.6%).

Table 3.5Review determination outcomes for 2015-16

2015-16 2014-15

Number % Number %

Total complaints determined in review

173 286

% of all complaints received within jurisdiction

12.9% 18.0%

OUTCOMES

Affi rmed 121 70% 224 78.3%

Remitted 10 5.7% 1 0.3%

Varied 1 0.6% 2 0.7%

Set aside 41 23.7% 59 20.6%

TYPE

Administration 53 30.6% 86 30%

Death 60 34.7% 128 44.8%

Disability 60 34.7% 72 25.2%

Figure 3.8Review determination outcomes 23.7%

5.7%0.6%

70%

Affirmed

Remitted

Varied

Set aside


CHAPTER FOUR

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY44 CHAIRPERSON AND DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON 45 PART TIME TRIBUNAL MEMBERS 46 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 48 EXTERNAL SCRUTINY

43

ChairpersonHELEN DAVISHelen started her fi ve-year term as Chairperson in May 2015. She has 20 years experience in

superannuation and fi nancial services. In past executive roles, Helen was Chief Offi cer Member

Outcomes and Chief Strategy Offi cer at QSuper. She was also Chief Executive Offi cer at Statewide

Financial Management Services. Helen has a Bachelor of Commerce, Master of Business

Administration and a Diploma of Superannuation Management. She is also an Australian Institute

of Company Directors graduate.

Deputy ChairpersonRAGINI RAJADURAIRagini was appointed Deputy Chairperson of the Tribunal for a fi ve-year term in June 2015. She

was a part-time Tribunal member between June 2012 and May 2015. Ragini has over 25 years

in law, superannuation, insurance, fi nancial services and alternative dispute resolution to the

Tribunal. Ragini was the Deputy Tolling Customer Ombudsman, barrister at the Victorian Bar,

lecturer in law at RMIT University, Manager Corporate and Legal Services at the General Insurance

Ombudsman Service and the Financial Ombudsman Service. She has a Bachelor of Laws, Bachelor

of Jurisprudence, a Master of Business Administration and is an experienced, nationally accredited

mediator.

CHAIRPERSON AND DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON

44 SUPERANNUATION COMPLAINTS TRIBUNAL ANNUAL REPORT 2015–2016SUPERANNUATION COMPLAINTS TRIBUNAL ANNUAL REPORT 2015–2016

PART TIME TRIBUNAL MEMBERS

Part Time Tribunal membersThe Tribunal operates with a number of part time members appointed by the Minister, with each member

serving a set term. They are drawn from superannuation, insurance, government, law, medical and actuarial

backgrounds.

Table 4.1Part TimeTribunal members throughout 2015-16

Tribunal Member Term commencement End of term

CURRENT

Anne Shanahan

9 February 2012 31 January 2017

Colin Cassidy

John Evans

Noel Davis

Jane Abbott

Litsa Tsitsis

Sue Walpole

Amanda MacDonald

5 August 2015 5 August 2019

Beth McConnell

Graham Rogers

Hayley Pope

Robin Creyke

Stephen Duffi eld

LEFT THROUGH FY15/16

Michaela Anderson

9 February 2012 8 February 2016Brian Lacey

Paul Trigg

45CHAPTER FOUR MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY

The Superannuation Complaints

Tribunal has in place structures

and processes to meet

its corporate governance

requirements.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The ExecutiveThe chairperson is the executive offi cer of the

Tribunal. They are responsible for the overall

operation and administration of the Tribunal’s

powers and functions in accordance with its

statutory objectives pursuant to ss 7A and 59(1)

of the SRC Act.

The chairperson is responsible for the

constitution and reconstitution of the Tribunal

at review; the selection of members for review

panels; and for the establishment of procedural

rules for the conduct of review meetings

pursuant to s 9.

Also, the chairperson is a repository of a

range of specifi c, non-delegable powers and

responsibilities such as formulating written

guidelines for the allocation of work among

the Tribunal members – s 7A(2)(b), (3); and

formulating guidelines setting out the way in

which the Tribunal is to be constituted for the

purposes of dealing with different classes of

complaints – s 9(2A).

The Superannuation Complaints Tribunal Advisory CouncilThe Superannuation Complaints Tribunal

Advisory Council (Advisory Council) was

established to maintain and strengthen the

Tribunal’s governance.

The Advisory Council provides a forum for the

Tribunal’s stakeholders to provide feedback and

advice in relation to high level strategic issues.

Australia’s superannuation system is

experiencing signifi cant shifts, which means

the Advisory Council’s feedback and advice will

be an increasingly important reference for the

Tribunal in the coming years.


At present, there are more superannuation

members in the accumulation phase than

in the drawdown phase – and general

engagement with super remains at relatively

low levels.

This will change, however, as a large number of

Australians reach retirement age and interact

with their providers on common matters

of complaint such as administration and

insurance.

New superannuation legislation and proposed

reforms will also lift engagement and generate

demand for information and education.

The Advisory Council ensures that the Tribunal

receives extensive current and emerging

stakeholder feedback to effectively carry out its

role as an independent dispute resolution body.

During the year, the following Advisory Council

members concluded their service:

Mark Cerché, representing corporate super

Dr Brendan French, representing retail

super

Jim Minto, representing insurers

Below is a list of current Advisory Council

members:

Colin Neave AM, Independent Chairperson

John Berrill, representing consumers

Chris Davies, representing corporate super

Leeanne Turner, representing industry super

Michael Dwyer AM, representing public

sector super

Linda Elkins, representing retail super

Brett Clark, representing insurers

Pam McAlister, representing service

providers.

Senior Management TeamThe senior management team assists the

chairperson in strategic decision-making,

management and oversight of the Tribunal’s

operations and performance.

It is the main forum to guide cross-Tribunal

issues and discuss elements of the Tribunal’s

corporate governance framework, including

business planning, risk management,

fi nance, human resources and performance

management.

Senior managers help staff achieve the

Tribunal’s objectives by promoting discussion

and input into organisational decisions;

creating learning and growth opportunities;

effectively communicating information; and by

celebrating and acknowledging achievements.

Internal scrutinyThe Tribunal continues to operate according to

a team model. Scrutiny of Tribunal processes

is routinely carried out at all levels by staff in

line with their seniority and experience. More

complex issues are dealt with by the senior

management team.

Fraud prevention, detection and controlASIC, on behalf of the Tribunal, operates in

accordance with the Commonwealth Fraud

Control Framework. This Framework ensures

the following measures are in place for the

Tribunal:

Fraud risk assessments

Fraud control plans

Mechanisms for preventing, detecting,

investigating, dealing with and recording

fraud.


EXTERNAL SCRUTINY

The Tribunal is scrutinised by external entities including the Parliament, various parliamentary committees,

the courts and certain Commonwealth departments and statutory bodies. Signifi cant developments during the

period are listed in the table below.

Table 4.2External scrutiny developments and response for 2015-16

External entity Development(s) Tribunal’s response

Parliament The Parliament scrutinises

the operation of the Tribunal

by way of the legislative

process, the tabling of

regulations and the tabling

of the Tribunal’s annual

report.

This year, the Tribunal

provided its biannual

indexed lists of fi les to be

tabled before the Senate

in accordance with Senate

Standing Order No 12.

The Tribunal responds

to questions on notice as

required.

Courts The jurisdiction, powers and

operations of the Tribunal

are open to judicial scrutiny

via statutory appeal and

judicial review. Specifi cally,

the Tribunal is subject to

judicial scrutiny by the

Federal Court of Australia

pursuant to s 46 of the SRC

Act, under the Administrative

Decisions (Judicial Review)

Act 1977 and under s 39B

of the Judiciary Act 1903.

Also, under s 39 of the SRC

Act, the Tribunal may refer

a question of law arising in

relation to a complaint to the

Federal Court to consider.

This reporting season fi ve

appeals from Tribunal

determinations were fi led

with the Federal Court

pursuant to s 46 of the

SRC Act. All court matters

involving the Tribunal over

the reporting year are listed

in Appendix 7.

Commonwealth

Ombudsman

Four formal enquiries were

made by the Commonwealth

Ombudsman under the

Ombudsman Act 1976 this

reporting year.

The four matters reported

required no further action.

None were pending as at 30

June 2016.


CONTINUED

Table 4.2External scrutiny developments and response for 2015-16

External entity Development(s) Tribunal’s response

Auditor-General

or Parliamentary

Committees

The Tribunal’s operations

were not the subject

of any report by the

Auditor-General or any

parliamentary committee

during the reporting period.

Not applicable

Information

Commissioner

No reports have been

made by the Australian

Information Commissioner

under the Privacy Act 1988 or

the Freedom of Information

Act 1982 in respect of

the Tribunal during this

reporting period.

Not applicable


ConsultantsAnnual reports contain information about actual

expenditure on contracts for consultancies.

Information on the value of contracts and

consultancies is available on the AusTender

website.

SUMMARYDuring the reporting period, four new

consultancy contracts were entered into

involving total actual expenditure of $43,400.

The main categories to describe consultants

used were communications, recruitment and

Tribunal support. There were no ongoing

consultancy contracts active during the period.

POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND CATEGORIESASIC’s use of Commonwealth resources and

expenditure of public money is primarily

governed by the Public Governance, Performance

and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act) and

the Public Governance, Performance and

Accountability Rule 2014 (PGPA Rule).

Responsibility for compliance with the

Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs)

lies with the appropriate fi nancial delegates.

The delegates are supported by a central

procurement team of qualifi ed procurement

offi cers who:

Develop and maintain ASIC’s procurement

processes and systems which are designed

to promote compliance with the PGPA Act,

PGPA Rule and the CPRs for all levels of

procurement

Manage complex and/or high risk

procurement activities, including

procurements that are subject to the

mandatory procurement procedures of the

CPRs.

ASIC’s procurement framework aims to

facilitate compliance with the core principles

and policies of the CPRs including ‘value

for money’, ‘encouraging competition’,

‘effi cient, effective, ethical and economical

use of resources’ and ‘accountability and

transparency’.

AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE CLAUSESDuring the reporting period, there were no

individual contracts above $100,000.

EXEMPT CONTRACTSDuring the reporting period, there were no

exempt contracts above $100,000.

Procurement initiatives to support small businessThe Tribunal supports small business

participation in the Commonwealth

Government procurement market. Small

and Medium Enterprises (SME) and Small

Enterprise participation statistics are available

on the Department of Finance’s website:

http://www.fi nance.gov.au/procurement/

statistics-on-commonwealth-purchasing-

contracts/

The Tribunal’s procurement practices support

SMEs through the use of the Small Business

Engagement Principles including ensuring

our requests for quotations are clear, written

in plain English and are presented in an

accessible format.

Advertising campaignsNo advertising campaigns were undertaken by

the Tribunal during the reporting year.


PrivacyThe Tribunal complies with the requirements

of the Privacy Act 1988 in relation to collecting,

processing, storing, using and disclosing

personal information.

Freedom of informationPart II of the Freedom of Information Act 1982

(the FOI Act) requires agencies to publish

information to the public as part of the

Information Publication Scheme (IPS). Our IPS

agency plan is available on our website at www.

sct.gov.au.

This reporting year, the Tribunal received 18 FOI

applications.

DOCUMENTS WE HOLDThe types of documents we hold include:

documents relating to complaints made

to the Tribunal, including Tribunal

determinations and reasons for the

determinations

an electronic case management system

containing information in relation to

complaints made to the Tribunal

Tribunal practice and procedure guidelines

documents and other materials containing

information on the Tribunal’s processes,

including information sheets and brochures.

LODGING AN FOI REQUESTIf you want to access one or more documents,

you must send a request in writing by mail, fax

or email. You should state the request is an

application for the purposes of the FOI Act and

provide suffi cient information so we can readily

identify the documents. You should also advise

how you would like to receive the

documents and provide a postal

address or email.

The application may be posted to:

The FOI Offi cer

Superannuation Complaints Tribunal

Locked Bag 3060

Melbourne, VIC 3001

Or email: [email protected]

Or fax: (03) 8635 5588

PROCESS FOR APPLICATIONSOn receiving an FOI request, we generally

fi rst seek permission from the provider of the

information to release the information pursuant

to s 63(3)(b) of the SRC Act.

If the information provider agrees, this usually

provides a faster, cheaper and more satisfactory

result for all. It also accords with s 3A of the

FOI Act which encourages the provision of

information access outside the FOI regime

where proper or required by law.

If the information provider does not agree to the

release of information, we then proceed with

the FOI application in the normal way

within the requisite statutory

timeframe.


SustainabilityDuring the period, the Tribunal continued to

fi nd ways to reduce its environmental footprint.

Current and ongoing actions included:

Recycling printer and photocopy cartridges

Duplex printing of internal documents, and

Implementing a project to digitise records

and mail.

Under its resource sharing arrangements

with ASIC, the Tribunal also participated in the

following current and ongoing activities:

Using energy-effi cient compact fl uorescent

tubes, and LED lighting in suitable areas

Kitchen waste recycling stations

Teleconferencing as a preferred alternative

to air travel.

For information about ASIC’s 2015-16

environmental performance and an update on

its Environmental Management Improvement

Plan 2015-17, please download the ASIC Annual

Report at asic.gov.auasic.gov.au.

Disability reportingInformation on Disability reporting under the

National Disability Strategy 2010-2020 can be

found at www.dss.gov.au.


APPENDICES54 APPENDIX 1:

FINANCIAL STATEMENT55 APPENDIX 2:

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH ASIC58 APPENDIX 3:

SERVICE CHARTER60 APPENDIX 4:

CHAIRPERSON’S GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURAL RULES 64 APPENDIX 5:

CONCILIATION ATTENDANCE GUIDELINES66 APPENDIX 6:

DELEGATIONS69 APPENDIX 7:

EXTERNAL SCRUTINY

53

Figure A1.1ASIC’s financial expenditure for the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal

($ M

illion

s)

01.0002.0003.0004.0005.0006.0007.0008.000

2015/16

2014/15

2013/14

5.23

8

5.91

9

6.64

2

Figure A1.2Tribunal member sitting fees

($ ‘0

00

)

0100200300400500600700800

2015/16

2014/15

2013/14

413 445

672

Figure A1.3Salary and Wages

($ M

illion

s)

0

1.000

2.000

3.000

4.000

5.000

2015/16

2014/15

2013/14

4.04

6

4.41

5

4.86

4

APPENDIX 1:FINANCIAL STATEMENT

Pursuant to s 62(2) of the SRC Act, ASIC provides the staff and facilities as are necessary or desirable to enable

the Tribunal to perform its functions.

ASIC advised that it incurred $5,238m on behalf of the Tribunal in 2015-16.

Figure A1.4Property expenses

($ ‘0

00

)

0

100

200

300

400

500

2015/16

2014/15

2013/14

281

423 45

3

Figure A1.5Operating expenses

($ ‘0

00

)

0100200300400500600700800

2015/16

2014/15

2013/14

498

636

653

Figure A1.6Staff numbers

0

10

20

30

40

50

2015/16

2014/15

2013/14

32

39

45


SCT & ASIC1. Objective

1.1 This MOU recognises that co-operation

between the parties is essential to the

effective and effi cient performance of their

respective duties and responsibilities within

the terms of relevant statutory provisions.

1.2 This MOU is not intended to create binding

obligations on either organisation and the

parties may by agreement vary its terms at

any time.

2. Responsibilities2.1 ASIC is responsible for the administration

and enforcement of the national scheme

laws, being laws of the Commonwealth,

States and Territories in relation to

Australian companies, securities and futures

markets; and for monitoring and promoting

market integrity and consumer protection in

relation to the Australian fi nancial system,

the provision of fi nancial services and the

payments system.

2.2 The SCT was established under the

Superannuation (Resolution of Complaints)

Act 1993 (SRC Act), as an independent

disputes resolution body which enables

certain superannuation-related complaints

to be dealt with where they have not

been satisfactorily resolved with the

superannuation entity. The functions of the

SCT are to provide for the fair, economical,

informal and quick resolution of complaints

by inquiry, conciliation and, if necessary, by

review.

3. Mutual Assistance3.1 The parties agree to provide each other with

reasonable assistance in relation to their

respective functions as is consistent with

relevant laws and this MOU.

APPENDIX 2: MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH ASIC

4. Information Sharing4.1 Information available to one party which is

relevant to the other in terms of legislation

or this MOU will be provided as soon as is

reasonably practicable, with due regard to the

urgency of doing so, subject to relevant law,

operational considerations and any conditions

which the provider of the information

might place upon the use or disclosure of

the information, such as claims of legal

professional privilege.

4.2 The parties will bear their own costs in

relation to referred and requested matters

outlined in this MOU.

4.3 The SCT will provide ASIC with copies

of reports, media releases and other

similar documents (other than documents

specifi cally created for ASIC or for the

purpose of a particular complaint) as soon

as practicable after they are provided to a

third party. ASIC will provide copies of policy

statements and media releases relevant to

the SCT’s functions as soon as practicable

after their release.

5. Referrals to ASIC 5.1 The SCT may refer to ASIC details of a

settlement that it thinks may require

investigation under subsection 31(2) of

the SRC Act and the Tribunal Chairperson

is obliged to report to ASIC the following

matters under sections 64, 64A and 65 of the

SRC Act:

a) a contravention of any law or the governing

rules of a fund that may have occurred;

b) a breach in the terms and conditions

relating to an annuity policy, or a

retirement savings account; and

c) the refusal or failure of a party to a

complaint to give effect to a determination

made by the SCT.

55APPENDICES

5.2 Referrals will be made as soon as practicable

after the SCT or the Tribunal Chairperson,

as the case may be, becomes aware of

the contravention, possible contravention,

breach or refusal or failure to give effect

to a determination and in accordance with

times and standards agreed with ASIC under

separate operational procedures.

5.3 The SCT acknowledges that ASIC will form

its own opinion as to whether, on the basis

of the information provided, it has reason to

suspect a contravention of the legislation for

which it has jurisdiction, or reason to take

any regulatory action, and that ASIC cannot

form any such opinions solely on the basis of

any opinion of the SCT.

5.4 Where the SCT believes that a particular

person may have information which may

assist ASIC in relation to a referral, the SCT

may nominate that person as a possible

source of additional information when

making the referral.

5.5 After the commencement of any action in

respect of a referred matter, ASIC will advise

the SCT of the contact details of an offi cer to

whom inquiries can be made by the Tribunal

Chairperson or his appropriately authorised

delegate.

5.6 Subject to any relevant law, ASIC will on

completion of all action in relation to a

particular referral, inform the SCT of the

outcome of ASIC’s actions.

6. Requests by ASIC6.1 ASIC may request information or production

of a document under subsection 63(3) of the

SRC Act. The request:

a) will be made in a written form and

in accordance with such operational

procedures as may be agreed from time to

time between ASIC and the SCT; and

b) will be signed either by:

i) the National Director, Regulation, or

ii) the Program Manager, Corporate Finance

and Managed Funds, or

iii) such other person as may be advised

in writing by the Program Manager,

Corporate Finance and Managed Funds or

by the National Director, Regulation.

6.2 Any requests by ASIC under subsection 63(3)

of the SRC Act will be kept confi dential by the

SCT, subject to any relevant law.

6.3 ASIC acknowledges that information and

documents provided by the SCT under

section 63 of the SRC Act will be subject to

the provisions of section 127 of the ASIC Act

1989.

7. Referrals to the SCT7.1 Complaints within the jurisdiction of the SCT

may be referred by ASIC to the SCT (by the

Financial Complaints Referral Centre (FCRC)

or otherwise) in accordance with operating

procedures agreed between the parties.

8. Confidentiality8.1 When one party receives information from the

other party in accordance with this MOU, it

will take all reasonable steps to ensure that

the information is dealt with in accordance

with applicable laws and consistently with

the purposes for which it was obtained, or as

otherwise authorised by the other party. In

such case the parties must keep each other

fully informed.

9. Liaison between the Parties9.1 The parties agree that there will be regular

liaison:

(a) at least annually between the Chairman

of ASIC and the Tribunal Chairperson in

relation to matters of common interest.


(b) at least once every two months between

relationship managers as appointed by

the parties from time to time, in relation

to more immediate operational matters

which may arise under this MOU, and

(c) on an “as needed” basis between contact

offi cers specifi ed in the operating

procedures and service level agreement

in relation to matters arising in respect of

ASIC’s responsibilities to make available

staff and facilities to the SCT under the

SRC Act.

10. Staff and Facilities10.1 Staff required to assist the Tribunal in the

performance of its functions are appointed

or employed by ASIC under the Public

Service Act 1922 and are answerable to

the Tribunal Chairperson. They are subject

to ASIC human resources policies, as

determined by ASIC from time to time.

10.2 ASIC will also make available certain

facilities to support the SCT’s functions

within terms of a service level agreement

to be agreed between ASIC and the SCT

and reviewed in conjunction with the

annual determination of the SCT’s budget

allocation.

10.3 The SCT is funded from the same budget

allocation as ASIC. The SCT budget

preparation, allocation and, where

appropriate, review, will be carried out in

conjunction with ASIC’s procedures, as

determined from time to time.

11. Disputes11.1 Where there is dispute over any matter

dealt with in this MOU, the parties will

seek to resolve the issue by negotiation

between the National Director, Regulation

and the Tribunal Chairperson. If resolution

cannot be achieved, then negotiation will be

between the Tribunal Chairperson and the

ASIC Chairman.

12. Review of the MOU12.1 The parties will keep the operation of

this MOU under continual review and will

consult with each other with a view to

improving its operation and resolving any

matters which may arise.

13. Termination13.1 A party may only terminate this MOU by

written notice. The MOU will terminate 45

days after the date upon which such notice

is received by the other party.

‘

Dated this ……6th…...day of……MAY……..1999

A Cameron(then Chairman)Australian Securities and Superannuation

Neil Wilkinson(then Chairperson)Investments Commission Complaints Tribunal

57APPENDICES

APPENDIX 3:SERVICE CHARTER

Our objectiveTo inquire into and resolve superannuation related

complaints in a manner that is fair, economical,

informal, and quick.

To achieve this objective we will:

deliver high quality service to complainants and the

superannuation industry

seek fair outcomes

make our service accessible to the community.

The Tribunal’s roleThe Tribunal will impartially inquire into complaints

about decisions made by superannuation providers.

The term ‘superannuation providers’ in this charter

includes: trustees of regulated superannuation funds

and approved deposit funds; retirement savings

account providers; and life companies providing

annuity policies.

Where possible, the Tribunal will try to resolve a

complaint by conciliation. Where that is unsuccessful

the matter may be referred to review for a

determination.

Our undertaking to youIf you have a complaint about a decision made by

a trustee or life company in the circumstances

described above, we will give it careful attention. We

will do whatever we can to help you within our powers

and resources.

If it is something we can and should deal with, we

will do this as quickly as possible, acting fairly and

independently.

If we cannot deal with your complaint, we will explain

why. If we can suggest another way to solve your

problem, we will tell you.

This charter sets out the standard

of service you can expect from us

and what we expect from you.


What you can expect from us a fee-free service

courteous, polite attention

assistance in making a complaint

acknowledgment of every written complaint within

seven working days

a contact name and telephone number on all our

letters

careful assessment of every complaint

individual case offi cers for matters we are able to

deal with

independent and impartial inquiry

a process that abides by the rules of procedural

fairness

respect for the privacy of confi dential information

telephone access to the staff at the Tribunal for the

cost of a local call from anywhere in Australia

access to interpreter assistance

referral to the appropriate organisation when we

cannot help, and

reasons for any decision we make.

What you can do to help usBefore you lodge your complaint with us, you must

have made the complaint to your superannuation

provider and given them an opportunity to resolve the

complaint.

Certain time limits apply, particularly if your complaint

concerns a disability benefi t or the distribution of a

death benefi t.

For further details refer to our booklet

‘Superannuation Complaints Tribunal: How it can help

you’ or call one of our telephone inquiry offi cers for

further details.

When you lodge your complaint, provide us with any

documents which relate to your complaint, such as

correspondence between yourself and your fund.

Feedback or complaints about our serviceBecause we are committed to improving our service

to the community, we welcome your views. If you have

been particularly pleased with your dealings with us,

please let us know. If you want to make a suggestion

or if you want to complain about our service, you can

do so via our website: www.sct.gov.au.

Alternatively, you can contact us by writing to the

following address:

The Chairperson


Locked Bag 3060

Melbourne VIC 3001

Facsimile: (03) 8635 5588

or email us at [email protected]

Your matter will be carefully considered by a senior

offi cer.

If you are still not satisfiedIf you are not satisfi ed after we have investigated

your complaint, you can contact the Commonwealth

Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman has an offi ce in every State and

Territory.

Complaints can be made in writing, by telephone or by

using the Ombudsman’s online complaint form.

The Ombudsman’s offi ce can be contacted by

telephone on 1300 362 072 for the cost of a local call.

The addresses and further information about the

Ombudsman can be found on the Internet at:

www.comb.gov.au.

59APPENDICES

APPENDIX 4: CHAIRPERSON’S GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURAL RULES1. Interpretation and application

(1) In this document:

(a) a reference to “the Act” is a reference

to the Superannuation (Resolution of

Complaints) Act 1993;

(b) a reference to “presiding member” is a

reference to the person identifi ed in s.9(3),

s.9(3A) or s.9(3B) of the Act and, where the

context requires for the purposes of the

procedural rules, is also a reference to a

single Tribunal member constituting the

Tribunal.

(2) Clause 2 is made for the purposes of s.7A(3),

s.9(1), s.9(2) and s.9(2A) of the Act. The

guidelines in clause 2 will also apply in

relation to any reconstitution of the Tribunal

under s.9(1A) and s.10(4) of the Act.

(3) Clauses 3 to 7 are made for the purposes of

establishing procedural rules for the conduct

of review meetings for the purposes of s.9(4)

of the Act.

2. Guidelines for the constitution of the Tribunal for a review meeting(1) For the purposes of dealing with a complaint

about a decision that relates to the payment

of a death benefi t and which primarily

concerns the distribution of the death benefi t,

the Tribunal will usually be constituted:

(a) where the sum involved is below $100,000

– by a single Tribunal member;

(b) where the sum involved is not less than

$100,000 – by 2 Tribunal members.

(2) For the purposes of dealing with a complaint

about a decision relating to the payment of a

disability benefi t where it would be likely that

the Tribunal would be required to undertake

the evaluation or assessment of medical

evidence or reports, the Tribunal will, if

possible, usually be constituted by 2 Tribunal

members, one of whom will be a member of

the medical profession.

(3) For the purposes of dealing with a complaint,

other than a complaint referred to in

paragraphs (1) or (2), the Tribunal will usually

be constituted:

(a) where the complaint involves a sum of

less than $50,000 – by a single Tribunal

Member; or

(b) where the complaint involves a sum of

not less than $50,000 – by 2 Tribunal

Members.

(4) Where:

(a) a party to a complaint notifi es the

Tribunal in advance of any Tribunal being

constituted in relation to that complaint

that there is an issue of principle to be

determined, or

(b) where the Tribunal identifi es such an

issue or there is some unusual diffi culty

associated with the complaint the Tribunal

Chairperson may, where the Tribunal

under paragraphs (1) or (3) may otherwise

be constituted by a single Tribunal

member, constitute the Tribunal by 2

Tribunal members.

(5) The Tribunal Chairperson will select the

Tribunal members and constitute the

Tribunal in relation to a particular complaint:

(a) in writing signed and dated by the Tribunal

Chairperson; and

(b) at a reasonable time before the scheduled

time of commencement of the review

meeting.

3. Commencement, adjournment and conclusion of review meetings(1) The review meeting commences at the date

and time fi xed under s.32(l) of the Act in

relation to the complaint.

(2) The presiding member may exercise the

power to adjourn a review meeting under s.42

of the Act and to re-convene the meeting for

further deliberations. If a review meeting

is adjourned the presiding member must

inform the Tribunal secretariat.


(3) If a review meeting is adjourned because the

Tribunal considers that further information is

required, the presiding member must direct

the Tribunal secretariat to request the further

information from the parties.

(4) The review meeting concludes when the

presiding member signs and dates the

determination and reasons.

4. The review meeting(1) If a question as to the Tribunal’s jurisdiction

in relation to the complaint arises the

Tribunal is to consider the question at the

review meeting. If:

(a) the Tribunal’s view is that the complaint

appears to be outside the Tribunal’s

jurisdiction; or

(b) the Tribunal members constituting the

Tribunal do not agree with the Tribunal

secretariat that the complaint appears to

be within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.

The presiding member must adjourn the

review meeting and refer the question to the

Tribunal Chairperson or, where the presiding

member is the Tribunal Chairperson, to the

Tribunal Deputy Chairperson for guidance.

(2) If the guidance of the Tribunal Chairperson or

the Tribunal Deputy Chairperson is that the

complaint is:

(a) within the Tribunal’s jurisdiction, the

presiding member will reconvene and

complete the review meeting consistent

with that guidance; or

(b) outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction,

the review meeting in relation to that

complaint will be abandoned and taken

not to have commenced.

(3) Where, after the receipt by the Tribunal

member or members constituting the

Tribunal of material in relation to a complaint

under the Tribunal’s submissions processes

for the purposes of s 32 and s 33 of the Act, a

party provides further material, the presiding

member may direct the Tribunal secretariat

that, in his or her opinion, it is necessary on

the grounds of procedural fairness that the

other parties be invited to make comments in

relation to the further material.

(4) The presiding member must consult with the

Tribunal Chairperson or, where the presiding

member is the Tribunal Chairperson, with

the Tribunal Deputy Chairperson before

the Tribunal refers a question of law to the

Federal Court for decision under s.39 of the

Act.

5. Oral submissions(1) The Tribunal Chairperson or the Tribunal

Deputy Chairperson will generally only make

an order under s.34(2) of the Act to allow

the parties to make oral submissions in

exceptional circumstances.

(2) An order to allow oral submissions will only

be made where the parties also present

written submissions prior to the review

meeting.

(3) Any oral submissions allowed shall be

presented in an order determined by the

presiding member, who shall provide the

opportunity for reply as procedural fairness

requires.

(4) At a review meeting, the presiding member

shall allow parties to raise questions of

another party through the presiding member

and shall also allow questioning of any party

by any Tribunal member.

(5) No determination shall be made at the review

meeting. Part 6 of the Act specifi es that a

determination and the reasons shall be in

writing.

61APPENDICES

6. Preparation and making of determinations(1) The Tribunal Chairperson will, for each

Tribunal constituted to deal with a complaint,

nominate the Tribunal member or

members who are to draft the wording of a

determination.

(2) All determinations and reasons should

basically follow the outline in the pro-

formas approved from time to time by the

Tribunal Chairperson. Such pro-formas

will include a layout for the cover pages and

fi nal signature. The pro-formas may include

standard sub-headings which may assist

both Tribunal members and staff of the

Tribunal undertaking word processing. The

pro-formas will not include standard form

paragraphs because each Tribunal must turn

its mind to the particular requirements and

circumstances of each individual complaint.

(3) Consistent with the secrecy provisions under

s.63 of the Act, the Tribunal’s determination

and reasons must be worded in such a

way that, after substituting an alternative

cover page, the document may be made

available to the public without enabling the

identifi cation of the parties.

Descriptive terms like Complainant, Trustee,

Member, Deceased Member, Insurer,

Employer, Infant Son, Daughter, Spouse, De

facto Spouse etc should be used.

(4) The reasons for the determination should

generally not include:

(a) observations as to whether a

contravention of any law, the governing

rules of a fund or the terms and conditions

of retirement savings account or an

annuity policy has or may have occurred;

or

(b) comments with respect to the design of

a product relevant to the complaint or

the actions of persons in the operation

or administration of that product outside

the context of providing adequate reasons

for the determination in relation to the

decision under review for the purposes of

s.40 of the Act.

(5) The reasons for the Tribunal’s determination

must not include or discuss a direction under

s.44(2), s.44(2A) or s.44(2B) of the Act. The

presiding member must inform the Tribunal

Chairperson if the Tribunal intends to give

such a direction.

(6) The presiding member shall seek to ensure

that a draft determination is prepared within

4 weeks of the conclusion of a Tribunal’s

deliberations at the scheduled or re-

convened review meeting, for signing off

within a further 4 weeks.

(7) The date of signing is to be indicated at the

end of the determination. The date on which

the scheduled review meeting was held, and

any date(s) on which the review meeting was

re-convened for further deliberations shall be

listed on the cover page of the determination.

(8) The date on which the determination is

signed is the date on which the determination

is made.

7. Disagreement between Tribunal members(1) The presiding member shall ensure that the

views of all Tribunal members that constitute

the Tribunal in relation to the complaint are

heard and considered at the review meeting,

and that all reasonable steps are taken to

achieve agreement to the determination and

reasons.


(2) Where a Tribunal is constituted by 2 Tribunal

members, disagreement as to some of the

reasoning but not as to the determination,

may, by agreement of the Tribunal members

constituting a Tribunal, be acknowledged

from time to time within the wording of the

reasons.

(3) Where a Tribunal is constituted by 2 Tribunal

members and they disagree as to the

determination, the decision of the presiding

member is taken to be the decision of both of

them.

(4) A Tribunal member who is not the presiding

member of a Tribunal constituted by 2

Tribunal members and who does not

agree with the presiding member as to the

determination to be made by the Tribunal

may prepare, to the extent necessary, a

separate statement of reasons which will

be attached to and distributed with the

determination and reasons of the presiding

member.

Helen DavisChairperson

25 May 2015

63APPENDICES

APPENDIX 5:CONCILIATION ATTENDANCE GUIDELINESGuidelines about when the Tribunal would ordinarily require persons to attend a conciliation conference

The Tribunal is also required to have regard to the

objectives in section 11 of the SRC Act, which requires

establishing mechanisms for the conciliation of

complaints ‘that are fair, economical, informal and

quick.’

Typical circumstances requiring attendance at a conciliation conference Death benefit distributionIf a person makes a complaint to the Tribunal about

a decision of a trustee of a regulated superannuation

fund to distribute a death benefi t in a particular way,

the Tribunal would make inquiries and obtain relevant

information from the trustee and any other party

involved in the matter. The Tribunal would normally

proceed with a conciliation conference.

Disability benefitsIn a complaint relating to a claim for a disability

benefi t that is declined on its merits, the Tribunal

would normally schedule a conciliation conference.

With a technical or complex matter, such as alleged

entitlement to insurance cover or alleged non-

disclosure of a pre-existing medical condition by the

complainant, the Tribunal may make appropriate

inquiry of the trustee and/or insurer with a view

to proceeding to a conference for the purpose of

narrowing the disputed issue(s) and/or clarifi cation of

the evidentiary matters.

Administrative actions, disclosure issues, etc.Decisions by trustees and other decision makers

comprising administrative action, account balance

advice, benefi t calculation, rollover request, account

interest crediting and disclosure issues relating to the

provision of information and advice (just to mention

some), are matters ordinarily regarded as appropriate

to the conciliation process.

Purpose of the guidelinesThese guidelines are published to assist in

understanding the Tribunal’s role in trying to resolve

complaints through the conciliation process. The

Tribunal is required by its governing legislation

to formulate guidelines indicating the kind of

circumstances in which it would ordinarily require

persons to attend a conciliation conference.

Attendance at a conference may, at the Tribunal’s

discretion be by telephone, in person or by any other

means of communication.

Conciliation by its very nature entails a consensual

arrangement by the parties with the aim of reaching

an agreement for resolution of the complaint. The

Tribunal’s conciliation process is a facilitative process.

This means the Tribunal provides the forum for the

parties to the complaint to engage in open discussion

about the complaint with the aim of reaching an

agreement.

The Tribunal cannot compel the parties to reach

agreement. The Tribunal’s role is one of hosting the

conference and providing assistance and information

to the parties to arrive at an amicable settlement of

the complaint or in narrowing the range of issues in

the complaint.

Matters for the Tribunal to consider on the holding of a conciliation conferenceWhere a complaint has been made to the Tribunal,

provided the Tribunal has the power to deal with

that complaint and it is not withdrawn, the Tribunal

is required to try and settle the complaint through

conciliation.

The Tribunal may require the parties to the complaint

or others whose presence is likely to be of assistance

in settling the complaint to attend a conciliation

conference. This will be done by written notice.


What procedures does the Tribunal follow relating to conciliation conferences?The following steps will be taken:

1. The parties will be notifi ed of the proposed

conciliation conference in writing.

2. In the event of a party expressing disagreement

with proceeding to a conference, then the Tribunal

will consider the reasons offered before deciding

whether or not to proceed with the conference.

3. Because of the varied locations of the parties, the

conferences will, unless otherwise decided by the

Tribunal, be conducted by telephone.

4. Documents as to factual events and medical

reports where relevant to a matter, may be provided

by the Tribunal to the parties prior to the holding of

a conference.

5. When a conference results in resolution of the

complaint or an undertaking being given by one

of the parties to conduct further enquiry or obtain

further reports, the Tribunal will confi rm the

outcome in writing to all parties.

6. There is a presumption against representation

contained in section 23 of the SRC Act, except

where the complainant has a disability (as

defi ned in the Disability Discrimination Act 1992)

or where the Tribunal ‘considers it necessary in

all the circumstances’. Where the Tribunal has,

prior to the holding of a conference, exercised its

discretion to allow an individual to be represented

by an agent (which term extends to include

legal representation), then the individual may be

represented by that agent. Where no application

to the Tribunal has been made for representation,

then a person wishing to be represented at

a conference must either seek the Trustee’s

agreement in advance, or at least have the

arrangement agreed in advance with all of the

other parties to the conference. Where the Tribunal

has refused representation by an agent then the

person must participate directly.

[Note: For those parties who have been given leave

by the Tribunal to be legally represented, the Tribunal

has no power to award costs, i.e. any party who

has legal representation at a conference before the

Tribunal must to bear their own legal costs.]

Failure to attend a conferenceIf a complainant fails to attend the conference, the

Tribunal may treat the complaint as if it had been

withdrawn by the complainant under section 21 of the

SRC Act.

A person other than a complainant commits an

offence if they fail to attend the conference when

required to do so. The penalty is 30 penalty units or

imprisonment for six months.

65APPENDICES

INSTRUMENT OF AUTHORISATION UNDER SUBSECTION 59 1 OF THE SUPERANNUATION RESOLUTION OF COMPLAINTS ACT 1993I, Helen Davis, Chairperson of the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal, pursuant to subsection 59(1) of the

Superannuation (Resolution of Complaints) Act 1993, authorise members of staff of the Tribunal holding a position

that is included in a category of positions identifi ed in Column 2 of the Table to exercise the powers of the

Tribunal identifi ed in respect of that category in Column 1 of the Table.

Table A6.1 Delegations Category Positions

EL2 Senior Manager Complaints Resolution, Legal Counsel

EL1 Manager Complaints Resolution, Review Specialist, Lawyer

ASIC 4Senior Complaints Analyst, Senior Jurisdiction Analyst,

Senior Conciliator, Lawyer

ASIC 3Complaints Analyst, Senior Support Services Offi cer,

Complaints Resolution Support Offi cer

ASIC 2 Support Services Offi cer

APPENDIX 6:DELEGATIONS

s12(1)(a) to inquire into complaint and try to resolve

by conciliation

s13 to prepare and make available memorandum

explaining how complaints dealt with

s16 to help complainants to make their complaints

s17 to give written notice when complaint received

s17A to give written notice when party joined

s18(1)(c),(d) & (e), s18(2)(c) &(d), s18(3)(c), s18(3A)

(c), (d) & (e) and s18(3B)(c), (d) & (e) whether to

decide that a person should be made a party to

complaint

s19 whether to be satisfi ed complaint was

fi rst made to trustee or RSA provider / that all

reasonable efforts made to fi rst resolve complaint

with insurer or superannuation provider

Column 1 Column 2

Power EL2 EL1 ASIC 4 ASIC 3 ASIC 2


Column 1 Column 2


s22(1) & (2) whether to decide to treat complaint

as withdrawn (satisfi ed that complainant doesn’t

intend to proceed) and to give notice of withdrawal

s22(3) & (4) whether to decide to treat complaint

as withdrawn (other reasons) and to give notice of

withdrawal

s23(2) & (3) whether to allow complainant to be

represented by an agent

s24(1) whether to allow a period longer than 28

days for trustee, insurer, RSA provider to give

documents

s24(2) whether to allow a relevant person a period

longer than 28 days to give documents

s24(4) whether to allow trustee, insurer, RSA

provider or other decision maker to give a summary

of documents

s24(4) whether to allow longer period to request

giving of summary of documents

s24(6) whether to give notice to joined party to give

Tribunal copies of specifi ed documents

s24(6) whether to allow longer period for joined

parties to give documents

s24AA(1) whether to allow to a period longer

than 28 days for superannuation provider to give

documents

s24AA(2) whether to allow superannuation provider

to give a summary of documents

s24AA(3) whether to allow longer period to request

giving of summary of documents

s24AA(4) whether to give notice to joined party to

give copies of specifi ed documents

s24AA(4) whether to allow longer period for joined

parties to give documents

s24A(1), (2), (2A) & (2B) whether to allow a period

longer than 28 days re death benefi t notifi cations by

trustee/insurer/RSA provider

s24A(3) whether to allow a period further than 28

days to be given in death benefi t notifi cation

67APPENDICES

s24A(5) whether to join party if party applies outside

time notifi ed

s25(1), (2) & (3) whether to give notice to require

information & documents

s27(a) to determine whether a complaint has been

made

s27(b) to determine whether a complaint has not

been withdrawn

s27(c) whether to be satisfi ed that the Tribunal can

deal with the complaint

s27 where s 27(a)-(c) met, to inquire into a

complaint and try to settle it by conciliation

s28(2) whether to give notice to require persons to

attend conciliation conference

s28(4) whether to treat complaint as withdrawn

(failure to attend conference)

s28(6) whether to recommend that conference

proceed with interpreter

s28(7) to formulate and make available guidelines

as to when persons required to attend conferences

s29 to determine manner in which conciliation

conference to be conducted

s31(1) to treat complaint as withdrawn (upon

settlement)

s32(1) to determine whether conciliation has not

been successful

s32(1) to fi x review meeting

s32(2) to invite submissions by date specifi ed

Helen DavisTribunal Chairperson

25 May 2015.

Column 1 Column 2



APPENDIX 7:EXTERNAL SCRUTINY

SECTION 46 FEDERAL COURT APPEALS FILEDMile Miljevic v Holden Employees Superannuation Fund

Pty Ltd [SAD380/2015]

Cherie Lee Bennett v Superannuation Complaints

Tribunal [NSD1489/2015]

Mercer Superannuation (Australia) Limited v Michael

Billinghurst [VID122/2016]

William Charles Dean v Trustee United Super Pty Ltd

also referred to as Construction and Building Unions

Superannuation Fund CBUS [WAD112/2016]

Carol Dianne Harris & Ors v Commonwealth

Superannuation Corporation [VID628/2016]

JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATIONS FILEDBradley Campbell v Superannuation Complaints Tribunal

[QUD178/2016]

Peng Gao v Superannuation Complaints Tribunal

[VID394/2016]

Walter Percival Edwards & Ors v Superannuation

Complaints Tribunal & Ors [VID629/2016]

FEDERAL COURT JUDGMENTS HANDED DOWNBurtaleea v AustralianSuper Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 521.

The Court dismissed the appeal against the Tribunal

treating the complaint as withdrawn.

Miljevic v Holden Employee Superannuation Fund Pty Ltd

[2016] FCA 718. The Court dismissed the appeal from

the Tribunal’s determination in relation to a Total and

Permanent Disability benefi t.

Sherrah v Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation

[2015] FCA 698. The Court dismissed the appeal

from the Tribunal’s determination in relation to the

calculation of a benefi t.

Williams v IS Industry Fund Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 524.

The Court allowed the appeal from the Tribunal’s

determination in relation to the distribution of a death

benefi t and remitted the matter to the Tribunal.

FEDERAL COURT APPEALS SETTLED OR DISCONTINUEDAllan William Douglass Gray v AustralianSuper & TAL

Insurance [SAD62/2015]

Sharon Lee Little v AMP Superannuation Limited &

Brenda Marie Gosney [WAD106/2015]

FEDERAL COURT MATTERS PENDING AT 30 JUNE 2016Cherie Lee Bennett v Superannuation Complaints

Tribunal [NSD1489/2015]

Mercer Superannuation (Australia) Limited v Michael

Billinghurst [VID122/2016]

William Charles Dean v Trustee United Super Pty Ltd

also referred to as Construction and Building Unions

Superannuation Fund CBUS [WAD112/2016]

Bradley Campbell v Superannuation Complaints Tribunal

[QUD178/2016]

Peng Gao v Superannuation Complaints Tribunal

[VID394/2016]

Kenneth L Matsen v Superannuation Complaints

Tribunal, Retail Employees Superannuation Pty Limited,

Cherie Lee-Bennett & Elizabeth Pearsall [NSD608/2015]

Deborah Ievers v Superannuation Complaints

Tribunal, SunSuper Pty Ltd & Shane Anthony Hattingh

[WAD264/2015]

Thomas Joseph McAtamney v Superannuation

Complaints Tribunal [VID421/2014]

Walter Percival Edwards & Ors v Superannuation

Complaints Tribunal & Ors [VID629/2016]

Carol Dianne Harris & Ors v Commonwealth

Superannuation Corporation [VID628/2016]

Adrian Ghibu v AMP Superannuation Ltd [NSD828/2013]

The following court matters involved the Tribunal in 2015-16

69APPENDICES

REFERENCES72 GLOSSARY73 COMPLIANCE INDEX74 INDEX78 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

71

APRA Australian Prudential Regulation Authority

ASIC Australian Securities and Investments Commission

ATO Australian Taxation Offi ce

FOI Freedom of information

MOU Memorandum of understanding

RSA Retirement savings account

SIS Act Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993

SIS Regulations Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994

SLA Service level agreement

SMSF Self-managed superannuation fund

SRC Act Superannuation (Resolution of Complaints) Act 1993

TPD Total and permanent disability

Tribunal Superannuation Complaints Tribunal

WH&S Workplace health and safety

GLOSSARY


This report complies with the Guidelines for the content, preparation and presentation of annual

reports by statutory authorities as set out in the Senate Hansard of 11 November 1982, p.2260.

The Tribunal is not bound to comply with the Requirements for Annual Reports, issued by the

Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet – 25 June 2015, but has had regard to them in so far as

they are relevant.

Asset management 29

Chairperson’s review 2-3

Consultancies 50

Contact offi ce 11, 59

Corporate governance, 46

Disability reporting 52

External scrutiny 48-49

Enterprise agreement 18, 20

Environmental performance 52

Financial statement 54

Fraud prevention and control 18, 47

Freedom of information 49, 51

Glossary 72

Human resources 17

Index 74

Indigenous employment 18

Information Publication Scheme Statement 51

Internet homepage address II

Judicial decisions in relation to the Tribunal’s decisions 48, 69

Letter of transmittal I

Management and accountability 28-30, 44-52

Organisation overview II, 5-15

Organisation structure 16-20

Small business procurement 50

COMPLIANCE INDEX

73REFERENCES

INDEX

AAbbott, Jane 45

Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 48

Advisory Council 46

Anderson, Michaela 3, 45

Appeal 15

Approved Deposit Funds 10

Australian Defence Force Cover Act 2015 (ADF Cover) 14

Australian Information Commissioner 49

Australian National Audit Offi ce 50

Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) 29, 30

Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) 17, 29, 30, 50, 52

ASIC Enterprise Agreement 18, 20

Australian Taxation Offi ce 11

BBerrill, John 47

Business Support function 17

Briffa & Ors v Hay (1997) 12

CCassidy, Colin 45

Cerché, Mark 3, 47

Chief Executive of Medicare 30

Clark, Brett 47

Complaints

Analysts 15, 21

Complexity 22

Lifecycle 15

Managing complaints 21

Number 35-40

Within jurisdiction 10

Outside jurisdiction 11

Referral 30

Resolution 23, 39-40

System 21

Trends 37

Value 36

Commissioner of Taxation 30

Commonwealth Fraud Control Framework 47

Commonwealth Ombudsman 49

Commonwealth Procurement Rules 29, 50

Conciliation 13, 15, 23, 24, 41

Conciliation Attendance Guidelines 64-65

Consultants 50

Consumers 23, 27

Contents III

Contractors 19

Contraventions 30

Corporate Governance 46

Chairperson 44

Contraventions reporting 30

Delegation 14

Executive Offi cer 46

Guidelines and Procedural Rules 28, 60-63

Insights for 27

Review 2-3

Creyke, Robin 45

Criminal law 27

DDavies, Chris 47

Davis, Helen 2-3, 44

Davis, Noel 45

Death benefi ts 12, 22

Delegation 14, 66-68

Department of the Treasury 30

Deputy Chairperson 14, 39, 44

Determinations 15, 30, 42

Disability insurance 22, 27

Disability reporting 52

Duffi eld, Stephen 45

Dwyer, Michael AM 47


EElkins, Linda 47

Evans, John 45

Executive 46

External scrutiny 48-49, 69

FFact sheets 22, 34

Fairness 24

Family law 27

Federal Court 15, 49, 69

Financial advisers 12, 23

Financial statement, 54

Fraud prevention, detection and control 47

Freedom of information 50

Freedom of Information Act 1982 49, 50

French, Dr Brendan 3, 47

Functions 8

Fund rules 22

GGovernance, 47

Governor-General 20

IIndustry 27

Information Publication Scheme 50

Internal scrutiny 47

Insurers 10

Insurance law, 27

Insurance premium complaints 37

Investigation 13, 15, 22-23

Inquiries 33-34

JJudiciary Act 1903 48

Jurisdiction 10, 38

KKey performance indicators (KPIs) 23

LLacy, Brian 3, 45

Life companies 10

Lifecycle of a complaint 15

Letter of Transmittal I

MMacDonald, Amanda 45

Management and accountability 43

Mandatory training 18

McAlister, Pam 47

McConnell, Beth 45

Memorandum of understanding with ASIC 55-57

Merkel, J 12

Minto, Jim 3, 47

Mission 5, 13

NNational operations 28

Nature of complaints 39

Neave, Colin AM 47

Negotiation 27

75REFERENCES

OO’Dwyer, the Hon Kelly MP 30

Objectives 13

Ombudsman Act 1976 48

Outside jurisdiction 12


PParliament 48


Pope, Hayley 45

Powers 9, 46

Privacy Act 49

Property law 27

Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 50

Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014 50

Public sector superannuation schemes 11

Public Service Act 1999 20

RRajadurai, Ragini 44

Referral of complaints 30

Relationships 29

Responsible minister 30

Retirement 23

Remuneration Tribunal Act 1973 20

Retirement Savings Accounts (RSA) 10, 30

Retirement Savings Accounts Act 1997 11

Review 13, 15, 23, 41

Rogers, Graham 45

Role and functions 8

SSelf-managed Superannuation Funds 11

Senior Complaints Analyst 22-23

Senior Conciliator 24-28

Senior Management Team 47

Service Charter 58-59

Settlements 30

Shanahan, Anne 45

Succession law 27

Superannuation (Resolution of Complaints) Act 1993 I, II, 8,11,12, 20, 28, 30, 46, 48, 51

Amendments to, 14


About the Tribunal, II

2015-16 at a glance 4

Career development 17

Complaints 35-40

Conciliation 24

Delegation 14

Enterprise agreement 20

Inquiry (Investigation) 13, 23

Inquiries 33

Jurisdiction 10, 23

Mission 5

Objectives 13



Powers 9

Resources and budget 29

Review of organisation structure 17

Role and function 8

Salary and performance pay 20

Service Level Agreement with ASIC 17, 29

Staff numbers 18-20

Training 17-18

Values 5

Vision 5


Superannuation Complaints Tribunal Advisory Council 46

Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 11, 30

Superannuation statements 23

Supervisory Levies Collection Act 1998 29

Sustainability 52

TTax law, 27

Total and permanent disability 12

Tribunal members 20, 42, 45, 46

Trigg, Paul 3, 45

Tsitsis, Litsa 45

Turner, Leeanne 47

VValues 5

Vision 5

WWalpole, Sue 45

Website hits 33

Within jurisdiction 10

Work health and safety 18

Workforce planning 19

Workload of conciliators 26

77REFERENCES

TablesTable 2.1 Tribunal staff (as at 30 June 2016) 19

Table 2.2 Workforce planning, retention and turnover during reporting period 19

Table 2.3 Salary range (2015-16 by classifi cation) 20

Table 2.4 Performance pay (2015-16 by classifi cation) 20

Table 3.1 Value of complaints received in 2015-16 36

Table 3.2 Proportion of total complaints in top 10 over time 37

Table 3.3 Data for complaints fi nalised, resolved or withdrawn 40

Table 3.4 Conciliation cases 2015-16 41

Table 3.5 Review determination outcomes for 2015-16 42

Table 4.1 Part Time Tribunal members throughout 2015-16 45

Table 4.2 External scrutiny developments and response for 2015-16 48

Table A6.1 Delegations 66

FiguresFigure 3.1 Volume of inquiries received 34

Figure 3.2 Volume of written complaints received 35

Figure 3.3 Nature of complaints 38

Figure 3.4 Trend over time in nature of complaints 39

Figure 3.5 Complaints fi nalised, resolved or withdrawn 40

Figure 3.6 Conciliation cases 2015-16 by type 41

Figure 3.7 Conciliation cases 2015-16 by result 41

Figure 3.8 Review determination outcomes 42

Figure A1.1 ASIC’s fi nancial expenditure for the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal 54

Figure A1.2 Tribunal member sitting fees 54

Figure A1.3 Salary and Wages 54

Figure A1.4 Property expenses 54

Figure A1.5 Operating expenses 54

Figure A1.6 Staff numbers 54

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES


WWW.SCT.GOV.AU