Why is there an energetic campaign to keep two old prison wings open—and to preserve the jobs tied to them? The answer is rooted in a collision of local economic survival, workforce uncertainty, and the broader challenges of running safe, adequately staffed prisons in a system already stretched thin. In Goulburn, New South Wales, the announcement to close two Victorian-era wings at the Goulburn Correctional Centre has sparked not just union outrage but a full-throated response from local government, workers, and the community, all intent on defending both their livelihoods and the town’s identity as a “jail town.” But beneath the headlines, the story reveals much about the tensions facing modern corrections—balancing safety, fiscal responsibility, and regional economic stability.
Short answer: The campaign to keep the two aged prison wings open and protect related jobs is driven by fears of significant job losses, harm to the local economy, and lack of a clear government plan for replacement or refurbishment. The closures are intended to address safety and infrastructure concerns, but unions, local officials, and community members argue that alternatives—like refurbishing the wings or building new facilities onsite—would better serve both staff and the region. The issue is amplified by chronic understaffing in prisons nationwide and the broader economic vulnerability of regional communities that rely on correctional jobs.
For Goulburn, the prison isn’t just a state facility—it’s a key economic anchor. As Goulburn MP Wendy Tuckerman puts it, “Goulburn Gaol underpins local jobs and provides stability for many families,” a sentiment echoed repeatedly in the Goulburn Post’s reporting. The numbers are stark: 220 staff positions are directly affected by the closure decision, including not only correctional officers but also administrative and Justice Health workers. The facility had only recently begun hiring casual staff again, a sign of local optimism that is now being dashed by the decision to cut capacity.
The fear goes beyond raw numbers. Tuckerman warns that “any decision that reduces activity at the facility sends a worrying signal about the future of secure employment in the NSW Public Service across Goulburn,” according to goulburnpost.com.au. In regional towns where large employers are few, such a contraction can have a “massive flow-on impact,” threatening not just direct jobs but local small businesses, housing markets, and community vitality. The closure is “a kick in the guts for city,” as Tuckerman succinctly frames it, highlighting the centrality of secure, public-sector jobs in the local social fabric.
Union Concerns: Safety, Staffing, and the Precariousness of Corrections Work
At the heart of the union campaign is not just job preservation, but a deep concern about the future of safe prison operations. As the Prison Officers Vocational Branch (POVB) points out, the closure of these wings comes on the heels of earlier closures, creating a sense that the facility is being gradually wound down without a coherent long-term plan. Staff describe a “dark cloud” hanging over them, frustrated by both the uncertainty and the perceived lack of consultation.
A major part of their argument is that, rather than simply abandoning the 1884-built wings, the government should invest in either refurbishing them or constructing modern facilities on the same site. “There’s plenty of room to build (modern facilities) there, if needed, and that’s what they should have done when they closed the old sections. It’s the perfect location,” union leader Darren King told the Goulburn Post. The union fears not only direct job losses but also the slow erosion of Goulburn as a corrections hub, especially given the high number of current vacancies and staff already on long-term workers’ compensation leave.
This anxiety is compounded by nationwide trends. According to prisonlegalnews.org, understaffing is endemic across the prison system, with a “common denominator” of dysfunction in “the most dysfunctional prisons PLN has reported on over the last 35 years.” The national shortage is severe: as of 2025, there were an estimated 31,000 vacant guard positions each year in the US alone, a trend mirrored in Australia and other countries. In such a context, eliminating positions at an established facility is seen as counterintuitive and risky, especially when “insufficient staff” is already cited as a reason for unsafe environments.
The “Change Management Plan” circulated by Corrective Services indicates that there will be “fewer fulltime equivalent positions at the prison as a result of the change,” despite official claims that “no correctional officer would be forced off the job.” Union representatives remain skeptical, worried that staff might be left underutilized, forced into other government departments, or simply face fewer shifts and reduced overtime, all of which would shrink their take-home pay (goulburnpost.com.au).
Safety and Infrastructure: Why Close the Wings?
On the government side, the rationale for closing the wings is rooted in safety and modern standards. The wings in question date back to 1883–1884, and a 2022 Inspector of Custodial Services report recommended their retirement, with the Corrective Services Commissioner calling the infrastructure “inadequate” (goulburnpost.com.au). The official line is that these closures are necessary for the safety of both inmates and staff, and that affected prisoners can be relocated to more modern facilities at Junee and Clarence.
But critics argue that this safety imperative is being wielded without a credible plan for what comes next. Both union officials and local politicians have questioned why refurbishment or onsite replacement has not been seriously examined. Mayor Nina Dillon noted, “I can’t see why they can’t refurbish the existing units or build new ones there,” reflecting a common view that the site’s ample space could accommodate modern facilities without decimating jobs or the local economy. In their eyes, the government’s decision is not about safety alone, but also about a lack of strategic investment in regional corrections infrastructure.
Jobs, Skills, and the Hard Road to Reemployment
The campaign to save the wings is also informed by a broader awareness of how difficult it is for correctional workers—and formerly incarcerated people—to find stable, meaningful employment if jobs disappear. Vera.org highlights that people with criminal convictions face an unemployment rate “nearly five times higher than the general United States population,” and that even those with skills honed inside prisons struggle to have them recognized on the outside. While the Goulburn situation focuses on correctional staff, the principle is the same: jobs lost in corrections are rarely replaced with equivalent, well-paid, secure roles in the same community.
A further complication is that, as prisonpolicy.org notes, the population of older prisoners is rising rapidly, and the costs of incarcerating and caring for them are ballooning. In the US, for example, the proportion of prisoners aged 55 and older has grown from 3% in 1991 to 15% in 2021, and “the cost of incarcerating older adults only appears to be growing.” The government’s decision to close aged wings may be partly an attempt to address these spiraling costs and the difficulties of maintaining very old infrastructure for a changing prison population. Yet, as the union and local politicians point out, abrupt closures—without a clear transition plan—risk not only staff livelihoods but also the orderly management of a vulnerable population.
Staffing Crisis: A National and Global Challenge
The Goulburn campaign is occurring against the backdrop of a global prison staffing crisis. According to prisonlegalnews.org, “the efficiency and functionality of every enterprise rests largely upon the staff put in place to carry out its operations.” Understaffing has been called the single greatest predictor of dysfunction in prison systems, leading to forced overtime, burnout, and increased risk of violence for both staff and inmates. In Georgia, for example, half of all guard positions were vacant in 2024, with remaining staff forced to work 16-hour shifts for five days a week. The same source notes that “[n]early half of all jails and prisons report that 20 to 30% of their workers leave each year,” and a significant proportion quit within a year or two.
In this context, keeping jobs in regional prisons like Goulburn isn’t just about economics; it’s about maintaining basic safety and operational standards in a sector already stretched to the breaking point. The loss of experienced staff, or the reduction in available positions, further destabilizes a system already struggling to recruit and retain enough workers.
Uncertainty, Consultation, and the Fight for a Plan
Perhaps the most consistent theme running through the campaign is frustration at the lack of a clear, transparent plan. Both union leaders and local politicians have criticized the government for “not having a plan” for the future of Goulburn Correctional Centre. As of late March 2026, staff were still waiting to see the department’s detailed change management plan, and there was “no detail on how many staff would be needed when the wings closed, or what would happen to 20 recently employed casual officers” (goulburnpost.com.au).
This uncertainty erodes trust and makes it harder for the community to accept changes, even when they may be justified by safety or cost concerns. The union has indicated that it will “lobby politicians and Goulburn Mulwaree Council to keep the wings and ensure no job losses,” and a new committee including council, business representatives, and union officials has been formed to explore alternatives.
What’s Next? The Stakes of the Campaign
The campaign to keep the wings open is about more than nostalgia for old infrastructure or resistance to change. It reflects the high stakes of corrections policy in regional Australia: jobs, community stability, public safety, and the challenge of adapting a historic system to modern realities. With “surge beds” being implemented elsewhere to accommodate a growing inmate population and a national labor shortage making it harder to staff prisons safely, the closure of functioning wings—without a replacement plan—feels to many like a step in the wrong direction.
Ultimately, the campaign is a fight for the future of Goulburn as a corrections town, for the dignity and security of its workers, and for a more thoughtful approach to managing the inevitable transitions in how—and where—society chooses to incarcerate its most dangerous or vulnerable people. As union leader Darren King told the Goulburn Post, “We’ll keep the fight going because we don’t think it should close. We think it’s infrastructure they should bring up to standard.” That fight is about jobs, yes, but also about respect, safety, and the right of regional communities to have a say in their own destinies.