Question:
RFI Questions Regarding Fair Work Compliance, Minimum Engagements and Payment Conditions



1. The Specification requires suppliers to comply with the Fair Work Act, applicable Modern Awards, penalty rates, overtime, allowances, superannuation and all employee entitlements. Please confirm that South Bank will accept supplier charges for any legally required minimum engagement, cancellation payment, rostered shift payment, overtime, penalty, allowance, break penalty or public holiday entitlement that arises under the applicable award or legislation, even where the relevant shift is later cancelled, reduced, stood down or not fully utilised by South Bank.

2. The Specification states that South Bank will not be liable for cancelled shifts or reduced hours and will only pay for hours actually worked and authorised. How does South Bank intend this requirement to operate where an applicable Modern Award requires the supplier to pay a casual employee a minimum engagement after they are required to attend work?

3. The Specification requires suppliers to minimise costs by reassigning or standing down personnel where staffing is reduced. Please clarify whether South Bank is asking suppliers to stand down employees without pay. If so, what Fair Work Act basis does South Bank consider applies to that stand down?

4. The Specification requires rates to include all employment costs and states that no additional charges will be accepted unless agreed in writing in advance. Please confirm that this does not prevent a supplier from recovering legally required employment costs that arise because of South Bank’s late changes, event delays, weather decisions, operational directions, break interruptions, extended hours, public holiday work or cancellation of confirmed shifts.

5. Where there is any inconsistency between South Bank’s payment conditions and a supplier’s legal obligation to pay staff under the Fair Work Act, National Employment Standards or applicable Modern Awards, please confirm which requirement South Bank expects the supplier to follow and whether South Bank will pay the resulting lawful employment cost.

6. Does South Bank expect that the successful supplier/s will carry costs that SBC’s own operational decisions create.

Answered on 05/Jun/2026 12:59 PM:


South Bank acknowledges that suppliers must comply with the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), National Employment Standards, and applicable Modern Awards.

South Bank’s position is that payment will be made for hours actually worked and authorised. However, where applicable workplace laws impose a mandatory minimum entitlement (for example, a minimum engagement period), South Bank will accept charges for those minimum amounts where the supplier is legally required to incur them as a direct result of South Bank’s request, and in accordance with the agreed commercial terms.

South Bank is open to a tiered cancellation framework (for example, based on defined notice periods such as 24 or 48 hours). Under such a framework, charges may apply where shifts are cancelled or reduced within agreed notice periods, provided that:

a) the costs are strictly limited to legally required minimum entitlements (e.g. minimum engagement payments);

b) the supplier can demonstrate that the costs were reasonably incurred and arise directly from South Bank’s request; and

c) the supplier has taken reasonable steps to mitigate those costs, including attempting to redeploy personnel, and is unable to do so.

South Bank expects any proposed cancellation model to clearly set out applicable notice periods, supporting rationale, and associated charges.

Beyond these circumstances, South Bank does not intend to accept liability for broader shift costs, rostered hours not worked, or additional charges exceeding legally mandated minimums, unless expressly agreed in writing in advance.

South Bank is not seeking to direct suppliers to stand down employees without pay in circumstances that would be inconsistent with the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth). Suppliers remain responsible for managing their workforce arrangements and for ensuring compliance with all applicable employment laws, including any decisions relating to redeployment, reduction of hours, or (where applicable) lawful stand down provisions. The intent of the Specification is to encourage suppliers to take reasonable and lawful steps to manage and minimise costs where staffing requirements change, including through redeployment or other workforce arrangements where practicable.

South Bank acknowledges that there may be circumstances where suppliers are unable to reduce costs due to legal or operational constraints. In those cases, suppliers are expected to manage those obligations in accordance with their legal requirements and the agreed commercial terms.

South Bank’s intent is to agree a commercial framework and payment terms that are consistent with the supplier’s obligations under applicable workplace laws. However, to the extent any inconsistency arises, the supplier must comply with its legal obligations, and nothing in the contract is intended to override, limit, or require non-compliance with those obligations.

South Bank does not intend that suppliers bear unlimited financial risk arising from operational changes; however, suppliers are expected to price and manage their services on the basis that variability in demand, scheduling, and utilisation is an inherent part of the service delivery model for events.

Question:
The Service Specification states that issued t-shirts must be returned “at the end of a staff member’s engagement period”, being when the individual is “no longer part of the Supplier’s resource pool for South Bank events”. The Service Specification also states that “South Bank does not guarantee minimum volumes of work under this arrangement”.

On that basis, please confirm:

1. How South Bank expects the Supplier to determine when a casual employee is no longer part of the Supplier’s resource pool for South Bank events, given there is no guaranteed volume of work and no guaranteed future engagement.

2. Whether South Bank accepts that, for casual personnel engaged on a shift-by-shift basis, the practical end of the person’s engagement is the end of each confirmed shift.

3. On the basis that all casual employment begins and ends on a per shift basis, does South Bank expect issued shirts to be returned at the end of each shift?

4. If shirts are returned at the end of each shift, whether South Bank will be responsible for laundering and reissuing those shirts in a clean, hygienic and presentable condition before they are used again.

5. If South Bank does not require shirts to be returned at the end of each shift, whether South Bank accepts that the Supplier cannot reasonably remain responsible for recovering uniform items from individuals who are no longer actively engaged to perform work.

6. Whether Supplier personnel may wear the Supplier’s own branded shirts where South Bank shirts or vests have not been recently cleaned, are not available, or are not suitable for the task being performed.

7. Whether the Supplier will only be responsible for lost items or damage caused by negligence or misuse during an active shift, and not for accidental damage, ordinary wear and tear, staining or deterioration that occurs while personnel are performing normal event, site, production or manual handling duties.

Answered on 16/Jun/2026 04:44 PM:


Thank you for your queries. South Bank provides the following clarifications:

1. South Bank expects the Supplier to apply its standard workforce management and HR practices to determine when an individual is no longer part of its active resource pool. This typically includes circumstances where a worker is no longer available for engagement, has ceased employment, or is otherwise not reasonably expected to be allocated future shifts. It is not intended to be assessed on a shift-by-shift basis.

2. South Bank does not consider the end of each shift to represent the end of a person’s engagement, where the individual remains available and eligible for future shifts within the Supplier’s resource pool.

3. No. South Bank does not require shirts to be returned at the end of each shift. Uniform management should be undertaken in a manner that is operationally efficient and practical, consistent with industry practice for casual workforces.

4. As shirts are not required to be returned after each shift, the Supplier is responsible for ensuring that all personnel are presented in a clean, hygienic, and professional manner, including managing laundering of uniforms during the course of engagement.

5. South Bank acknowledges that the Supplier is required to take reasonable steps to recover issued items from personnel who are no longer part of the active resource pool. This obligation does not extend to absolute recovery in all circumstances but does require the Supplier to have appropriate controls, processes, and follow-up actions in place.

6. Supplier personnel are expected to wear South Bank issued uniforms where provided and required for the role. Supplier branded shirts may only be worn with prior approval from South Bank in circumstances where issued uniforms are unavailable or unsuitable for the task.

7. The Supplier is responsible for uniforms issued to its personnel and for ensuring their appropriate use and care during engagements.

South Bank accepts that this responsibility applies to loss or damage arising from negligence, misuse, or failure to take reasonable care.

Normal wear and tear arising from standard duties is expected; however, uniforms should be maintained in a condition suitable for presentation at public events.

Question:
We have two clarification questions regarding the structure of the Pricing Schedule (Attachment D).

1. Award reference — Category 1 tab: The Category 1 tab is headed "Visitor Economy Industry Award 2020." We have been unable to locate this award on the Fair Work Ombudsman's register. We intend to price Category 1 roles against the Amusement, Events and Recreation Award 2020 (MA000080). Could South Bank confirm whether this award reference is a documentation error, and confirm the correct award for Category 1 pricing purposes?

2. Supervisory roles vs skill-level columns — Category 1 & Category 3: Several listed roles are inherently supervisory or management level, while the form still presents lower skill-level rate columns alongside them — for example, "FOH Supervisors" in Category 1 (against Level 1/Level 2 columns), and "Bar Supervisors," "Hospitality Supervisors," in Category 3 (against Level 1–3 columns). Could South Bank confirm whether the lower-level cells should be left blank for these roles, or populated with the same relevant supervisory/management rate?

Answered on 18/Jun/2026 06:06 PM:


1. Apologies, the Visitor Economy Industry Award is incorrect. The correct award is Amusement, Events and Recreation Award 2020 (MA000080)

2. Please leave the lower-level cells blank in those instances.

Question:
The clarification states that tenderers are not required to demonstrate capability across every role within a sub-category, but also states that broader capability may be assessed more favourably. This appears to create different evaluation bases for different tenderers. One supplier may nominate only the roles they can confidently supply, while another may nominate a broader range of roles in order to appear more comprehensive. It is unclear how those responses can be compared fairly if each tenderer is effectively choosing which parts of the scope they will be assessed against.

Could South Bank please clarify:

Will tenderers be scored only against the specific roles they nominate, or will the breadth of roles nominated also contribute to the evaluation score?

If broader role coverage may be assessed more favourably, what criterion or weighting will be used to assess that?

How will South Bank ensure that a narrow specialist supplier and a broader generalist supplier are assessed fairly and comparably?

Will the resulting contract award be role-specific, sub-category-specific, or both?

After award, will South Bank only be able to request services from a supplier for the specific roles for which that supplier has demonstrated sufficient capability?

How will South Bank prevent post-award price-shopping, where lower-rate role categories are requested while higher-skill event supervision, production or technical labour is actually required?

Will all material VendorPanel answers, accepted departures and tender clarifications form part of the final contract terms?

We ask because the current clarification appears to create uncertainty around role selection, evaluation methodology, final contract scope and commercial risk allocation. This makes it difficult for suppliers to know whether to submit a narrow role-specific offer, a broad sub-category offer, or a full-suite offer, and how those different responses will be judged against the same evaluation criteria.

We also ask South Bank to clarify whether these issues will be addressed by formal addendum, clarification notice, revised contract wording or extension of the tender period, so all tenderers can respond on an equal and informed basis.

Answered on 22/Jun/2026 04:29 PM:


The previous clarification has been amended for clarity. SBC is not evaluating each role within each category, rather we are evaluating each Category. The roles listed within each category are indicative rather than exhaustive, as outlined in the tender documentation. South Bank is requesting submissions from suppliers who can provide broad and flexible coverage across the types of roles required within a Category, rather than meeting a fixed, line-by-line checklist against all roles. Given the evolving nature of events, additional or varied roles may arise from time to time that are not specifically listed. Evaluation will focus on a supplier’s demonstrated ability to deliver a range of roles and services within the category, supported by relevant experience, capability and capacity.

Q1: Will tenderers be scored only against the specific roles they nominate, or will the breadth of roles nominated also contribute to the evaluation score?

Tenderers will be scored against each category they are tendering for:

1. Category 1

2. Category 2

3. Category 3.

The Evaluation Criteria out of a total of 100% will be applied to each Category the tenderer is submitting for to produce a score per category.

Q2: If broader role coverage may be assessed more favourably, what criterion or weighting will be used to assess that?

Criteria 2. Services Delivery Approach, Capability and Workforce Coverage, which makes up 25% of the total weighting. Specifically, Q2.2 Detail your workforce capability, including the size, composition and availability of your labour pool and your ability to provide the full range of required roles.

Q3: How will South Bank ensure that a narrow specialist supplier and a broader generalist supplier are assessed fairly and comparably?

Submissions will be evaluated separately for each category of service using the same criteria and weightings. This ensures that specialist suppliers are assessed only on the category they are responding to, while generalist suppliers are assessed on each category independently.

This approach ensures that all suppliers are compared on a like-for-like basis within each category. All suppliers will be assessed using the same published evaluation criteria, questions, and weightings, ensuring consistency and transparency. The evaluation panel will assess responses in the context of the specific category, with scoring as per the published evaluation criteria, questions and weightings.

Q4: Will the resulting contract award be role-specific, sub-category-specific, or both?

Category specific

Q5: After award, will South Bank only be able to request services from a supplier for the specific roles for which that supplier has demonstrated sufficient capability?

After award, South Bank will only be able to request services from a supplier for the specific ‘categories’ for which that supplier has been selected.

Q6: How will South Bank prevent post-award price-shopping, where lower-rate role categories are requested while higher-skill event supervision, production or technical labour is actually required?

South Bank will provide a clear brief for each request, including the event context and requirements. While we may indicate the role types or levels anticipated, it will ultimately be the supplier’s responsibility to propose and supply roles at the appropriate skill level to meet that brief. Suppliers will be expected to flag any mismatch or risks in role selection at the point of the request. Contract management will monitor outcomes and address any inconsistencies if they arise.

Q7: Will all material VendorPanel answers, accepted departures and tender clarifications form part of the final contract terms?

Not necessarily. Responses provided in VendorPanel, including clarifications and accepted departures, will inform the contract development process, however the final contract terms will be those agreed during negotiation with the successful supplier(s). Where relevant, key commitments and agreed positions may be incorporated into the final contract.

Q8: We ask because the current clarification appears to create uncertainty around role selection, evaluation methodology, final contract scope and commercial risk allocation. This makes it difficult for suppliers to know whether to submit a narrow role-specific offer, a broad sub-category offer, or a full-suite offer, and how those different responses will be judged against the same evaluation criteria.

South Bank considers the tender documentation and clarifications to be clear in allowing suppliers to respond to one, some, or all categories based on their capability and coverage. The tender documentation and pricing schedule specifies the types of roles within each category, noting that these are indicative rather than exhaustive. Suppliers are not required to submit a full-suite offer and will be evaluated only on the categories they choose to respond to. The evaluation criteria will be applied consistently, with responses assessed in the context of the relevant category to support both specialist and multi-category offerings without disadvantage.

Q9: We also ask South Bank to clarify whether these issues will be addressed by formal addendum, clarification notice, revised contract wording or extension of the tender period, so all tenderers can respond on an equal and informed basis.

At this stage, no further addendum or extension is proposed. Should any material changes arise, South Bank will issue a formal addendum to ensure all suppliers are treated equitably.

Question:
Could you please confirm whether a tenderer submitting for a given Category (e.g. Category 3) is required to demonstrate capability across every individual role listed within that Category, or whether a tenderer may omit specific roles within a Category, provided this is clearly disclosed

Answered on 22/Jun/2026 09:04 AM:
(edited on 22/Jun/2026 04:15 PM)


** This answer has been amended to clarify that the evaluation will be undertaken based on the Categories nominated by the tenderer, not the roles within a category**

Tenderers are not required to demonstrate capability across every role within a sub-category. However, South Bank's preference is for tenderers to be able to deliver a comprehensive capability across the full suite of roles within a sub-category. Tenderers who can demonstrate capability across a broader range of roles may be assessed more favourably. Tenderers may nominate the specific roles within a sub-category for which they are proposing to provide services. These must be clearly identified in their submission, and any roles not offered should be explicitly disclosed. Evaluation will be undertaken based on the Categories nominated by the tenderer, and appointment will apply only to those Categories for which sufficient capability has been demonstrated.