• Catch issues early, fix them fast – Free trial


    [ad] With GFI Cloud you can easily manage and secure your remote workforce – wherever they are, from wherever you are! The simple IT management platform includes patch management, antivirus, web protection, monitoring and remote control. Get the benefit of endpoint protection with the ease of central management. Start a free trial now.


  • Great articles on other sites
  • RSS Great articles on other sites

  • Enterprise IT, Featured, News - Written by on Friday, June 1, 2012 16:11 - 6 Comments

    Qld Health payroll: The lawsuit may be back on

    news The new LNP Queensland Government is reportedly attempting to source legal advice created for the previous Bligh Labor Government with respect to whether it would be feasible to sue vendors involved in the disastrous Queensland Health payroll systems implementation.

    In June 2010, following a damning report by the state’s Auditor-General into the payroll fiasco, which has seen many Queensland Health workers go unpaid and many others overpaid, the Bligh Government sought legal advice on whether vendors involved in the project could be sued for damages.

    “The Auditor-General’s report clearly identifies failings on the part of contracted provider IBM,” said a statement issued by then-Queensland Premier Anna Bligh and Health Minister Paul Lucas, noting the state reserved its right to withhold final payment and seek damages. “We have sought Crown Law advice in relation to options for terminating the payroll contract with IBM and it’s only fair that we seek to reserve our legal rights. The Government has issued IBM a Show Cause Notice as to why the contract should not be terminated,” Bligh said.

    That advice never went anywhere, to this publication’s knowledge, but it appears as if the new LNP Government led by Premier Campbell Newman may seek to resurrect the proposed legal action.
    LNP Health Minister Lawrence Springborg is currently seeking to find the legal advice provided to the previous government, according to an article published by the Courier Mail newspaper this week, but had been stymied, allegedly, because the material had become a Cabinet document and was therefore protected. The Labor Opposition has denied that the documents hold a solution to the payroll mess.

    The Auditor-General’s report filed in 2010 found that all concerned in the implementation — prime contractor IBM, Queensland Health itself and government shared services provider CorpTech — significantly underestimated the necessary scope of the project. IBM had initially told the Government that a “relatively small” amount of functionality would be required to implement a similar new payroll system at Queenland Health as a previous build at Queensland Housing — despite the fact that the Housing rollout only catered for 1200-1300 staff, compared with Health’s 78,000.

    The payroll systems rollout was based on software provided by German giant SAP, but SAP is believed to have had little to do with the implementation. However, also involved is the Workbrain workforce management software provided by software vendor Infor.

    In 2010, IBM defended its implementation at Queensland Health, when asked to respond to the prospect of facing legal action by the Queensland Government. “As a global company with deep expertise in dealing with highly complex systems implementations, we vigorously defend the quality of the system we delivered to Queensland Government,” the company said at the time. Big Blue maintained it was “not responsible” for many key aspects of the payroll overhaul as confirmed in the Auditor-General’s report.

    “We delivered within the governance structure established by Queensland Health and outlined in the Auditor General’s report,” the company added. “IBM has relentlessly and consistently delivered above and beyond the scope of the contract to assist Queensland Health identify and address concerns with its payroll process.” The company said its commitment to supporting the state in its mission to provide quality services to employees remained unchanged.

    Whatever path the Queensland Government takes with respect to the future of the system, it is likely to be expensive. Springbord has publicly stated that the cost of fixing the platform may rise eventually to $440 million.

    opinion/analysis
    To be honest I don’t think the new LNP Government really knows what they are dealing with with regards to the disastrous payroll systems implementation at Queensland Health, and I don’t think they understand the dynamics involved between the implementation and the involvement of the various vendors either. Shocking, I know, that politicians may not understand complex technology implementations. I suspect it may take them three to four years to understand this problem and fix it. I await the next audit report into the issue with bated breath.

    Personally, I don’t think it would be a good idea for the State Government to sue IBM over the issue. Frankly, Queensland is likely still very reliant on IBM to keep this system working, and while IBM may share some of the blame for the issue in the first place, I suspect any court would find the lion’s share of the blame should go to the Government itself and its poor governance of the project. Besides, it’s not as if the state is going to be able to avoid dealing with IBM in the future — no major Australian organisation is uninvolved with the vendor — that’s how big it is. Probably the better course of valor would be to use the payroll issue as a stimulus to get better outcomes in other areas.

    Image credit: Capcom/Nintendo (Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney video game)

    submit to reddit

    6 Comments

    You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

    1. Posted 01/06/2012 at 8:12 pm | Permalink |

      Not to mention IBM knows how to write some air tight contracts that leave little room for it to be successfully sued.

    2. Qld Health = bad client = poor taxpayer
      Posted 01/06/2012 at 10:49 pm | Permalink |

      Queensland Health executive have a habit of blaming everyone other than themselves. This is a repeat performance.

      For example, the precurser to the current non delivery ehealth program was the trakhealth related project. This also ended up in court. This occured when Queensland Health countersued the vendor for 5 times the cost of the project.

      What is now commonly known is that Trakhealth has been found to have been subsequently implemented in many other jurisdictions in Australia and overseas. This would seem to suggest that the problem(s) were in no small measure to do with the client.

      In addition, the rationale provided by Queensland Health for the breaking of the contract and subsequent legal case was that the vendor Trakhealth’s technology could not scale to Queensland Health requirements. Anyone in the industry who knows the circumstances and anyone who only has a mild interest would also know the small but not insignificant fact that Trakhealth is built on and uses perhaps one of the most widely used and respected technologies in healthcare. Hence Queensland Health was not entirely honest in its dealings.

      Advance some considerable years later a failed payroll program and complete denial that $0.5B+ has been blown on ehealth for no substantial outcome. (Anyone who has worked in QH ehealth knows the so called “viewer” which just won an award was a so called tactical quick win project of the original ehealth program. It would seem that a tactical quick win takes 5-7 yrs.

      (here’s hoping that’s sufficient for those in QH IT to keep their jobs and not have the whole lot outsourced by the NLP).

      • Zwan
        Posted 02/06/2012 at 11:49 am | Permalink |

        100% agree its clear Queensland health can’t articulate their requirements to their vendors.

        But blame also lies on the vendors too. They shouldn’t be taking on the project blind like they have and caught wind the Queensland health were incompetent to hand such a project.

    3. Zaphod
      Posted 04/06/2012 at 1:50 pm | Permalink |

      Umm, it’s not ONLY an IT problem. One of the biggest issues was QH’s decision to centralise roster and timesheet processing at the same time as the roll out of the new system.

      The second big mistake was the architecture between SAP and WorkBrain. That was Corptech’s design.

      IBM did what they were told. And it works. If you put correct information into WorkBrain, it produces the correct pay (at huge cost it IT processing, but it does work).

      A pity the government’s lawyers weren’t on the ball when the contract was signed. If the government goes ahead with their suit far too many uncomfortable facts will come out. And IBM will still be able to say “we did what you contracted us to do”.

    4. Knows a thing or two
      Posted 06/06/2012 at 4:36 pm | Permalink |

      “Did what you contacted us to do?” The contractual obligations were written in braille. I.B.M amongst others relied on the fact they didn’t think the system would be implemented until more money was spent on providing additional applications to read, correct and write payroll information in to databases that then could be fed into these programs. It’s fine to want something, but when you have promised you can supply something and then start changing the terms that/’s when you are in breach. [censored by Renai] IBM will quickly change their tune when they realise QLD”ers are tough and come from the smart state. We don’t take kindly to cockroaches or shonky business. They won’t be asked to develop I.T programs in this state again.

      Paul Lucas

    5. Was on the ground
      Posted 06/06/2012 at 9:02 pm | Permalink |

      The solution was only designed to be an interim solution until the whole of government solution replaced it. When the main programme was halted, they had limited choices, as the existing system was failing daily. However instead of being sensible, it was a land grab by Qld Health, to see how much they could stuff into the solution, adding to it’s complexity and abusing the contract relationship between CorpTech (and hence IBM). CorpTech just stood back and let it happen.




    Get our 'Best of the Week' newsletter on Fridays

    Just the most important stories, one email a week.

    Email address:


  • Most Popular Content

  • Enterprise IT stories

    • Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp facepalm2

      If you have even a skin deep awareness of the structure of Australia’s superannuation industry, you’ll be aware that much of the underlying infrastructure used by many of the nation’s major funds — AustralianSuper, CBus, HESTA and more — is provided by a centralised group, Superpartners. One of the group’s main projects in recent years has been to dramatically update and modernise its IT platform — its version of a core banking platform overhaul. Unfortunately, as was revealed in November, the $250 million project has not precisely been going well, and the Financial Review last week reported that Superpartners is actually close to turfing it altogether and going back to the drawing board.

    • Qld’s Grant joins analyst firm IBRS peter-grant

      This week it emerged that Peter Grant, the two-time former Queensland Whole of Government CIO (pictured), has joined well-regarded analyst firm Intelligent Business Research Services (IBRS). We’ve long had a high regard for IBRS, and so it’s fantastic to see such an experienced executive join its ranks.

    • Westpac dumps desk phones for Samsung Android mobiles samsung-galaxy-ace-3

      The era of troublesome desk phones tied to physical locations is gradually coming to an end in many workplaces, with mobile phones becoming increasingly popular as organisations’ main method of voice telecommunications. But some groups are more advanced than others when it comes to adoption of the trend. One of those is Westpac.

    • Ministers’ cloud approval lasted just a year reverse

      Remember how twelve months ago, the Federal Government released a new cloud computing security and privacy directive which required departments and agencies to explicitly acquire the approval of the Attorney-General and the relevant portfolio minister before government data containing private information could be stored in offshore facilities? Remember how the policy was strongly criticised by Microsoft, Government CIOs and Delimiter? Well, it looks like the policy is about to be reversed.

    • WA Govt can’t fund school IT upgrades oops key

      In news from The Department of Disturbing Facts, iTNews revealed late last week that Western Australia’s Department of Education has run out of money halfway through the deployment of new fundamental IT infrastructure to the state’s schools.

    • Turnbull outlines Govt ICT vision turnbull-5

      Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has published an extensive article arguing that the Federal Government needed to do a better job of connecting with Australians via digital channels and that public sector IT projects needn’t cost the huge amounts that some have in the past.

    • NZ Govt pushes hard into cloud zealand

      New Zealand’s national Government announced a whole of government contract this morning for what it terms ‘Office Productivity as a Service’ services. This includes email and calendaring services, as well as file-sharing, mobility, instant messaging and collaboration services. The contract complements two existing contracts — Desktop as a Service and Enterprise Content Management as a Service.

    • CommBank reveals Harte’s replacement whiteing

      The Commonwealth Bank of Australia has promoted an internal executive who joined the bank in September after a lengthy career at petroleum giant VP and IT services group Accenture to replace its outgoing chief information officer Michael Harte, who announced in early May that he would leave the bank.

    • Jeff Smith quits Suncorp for IBM jeffsmith4

      Second-tier Australian bank and financial services group Suncorp today announced that its long-serving top technology executive Jeff Smith would leave to take up a senior role with IBM in the United States, in an announcement which marks the end of an era for the nation’s banking IT sector.

    • Small business missing the mobile, social, cloud revolution iphone-stock

      Most companies that live and breathe the online revolution are not tech startups, but smart smaller firms that use online tools to run their core business better: to cut costs, reach customers and suppliers, innovate and get more control. Many others, however, are falling behind, according to a new Grattan Institute discussion paper.

  • Blog, Enterprise IT - Jul 5, 2014 13:53 - 0 Comments

    Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp

    More In Enterprise IT


    Blog, Telecommunications - Jul 5, 2014 12:12 - 0 Comments

    What should the ACCC’s role be in guiding infrastructure spending?

    More In Telecommunications


    Analysis, Industry, Internet - Jun 23, 2014 10:33 - 0 Comments

    ‘Google Schmoogle’ – how Yellow Pages got it so wrong

    More In Industry


    Blog, Digital Rights - Jun 30, 2014 22:24 - 0 Comments

    Will Netflix launch in Australia, or not?

    More In Digital Rights