Letters
to the Editor
How
or not to farewell
A WO1 from
my section recently discharged after 23 years in the Army.
His official
farewell from the Army consisted of a public servant’s signature
on the last of numerous forms he filled out.
This is
disgraceful way to treat a soldier after so long in the service.
An official
farewell from a high ranking officer would leave the discharging soldier
with the feeling that their efforts were appreciated.
We spend
millions of dollars every year on recruiting campaigns when our best
advert must be a satisfied serving or ex-serving member.
Can anyone
tell me why we don’t formally recognise discharging soldiers’
service?
Capt Iain Watt
DMO
Victoria Barracks, Melbourne
Col
Mick Kehoe, DGPers-A, replies:
The Chief of Army has clearly articulated his intent on this issue in
his Directive to the Army 4/01 dated March 8, 2001. All Army’s
leaders have a responsibility to ensure our members leaving the Army
are recognised for their loyal and dedicated service and the Directive
stipulates that a Discharge Ceremony is to be held for those who have
completed at least their initial appointment or engagement. Wherever
possible these ceremonies are to be conducted in the members departing
workplace.
For those
in non-Army groups, the ceremony would be conducted by the senior Army
officer on the establishment.
The Directive
is quite clear on how this should be conducted including the presentation
of a Certificate of Appreciation which is available on request from
WO Ceremonial in Army HQ.
I appreciate
this can be difficult in some areas which are predominantly civilian,
however, the onus falls to the senior Army person in the member’s
workplace to show some initiative in this matter.
Army Area
representatives in places such as Melbourne have been appointed by CA
and are able to assist with the ceremony if requested. Members who have
served for a period of 20 years or more are also normally farewelled
in style by their Corps at the next appropriate Corps Mess dinner. It
is impractical to have a formal event occur on the final day in uniform,
particularly if this occurs some time after departure from the workplace
and the member is on some form of extended leave.
If this
situation applied to the individual you describe, his ‘final farewell’
would likely be at the annual Corps Sergeants Mess dinner in front of
fellow Corps members and friends of long standing. I think most would
agree this would be a fitting ‘official’ farewell.
Waste
not . . .
Each month
I receive innumerable copies of glossy colour brochures from every corner
of Defence often duplicating what is already posted on that department’s
webpage.
In the
interest of saving production costs, the waste of individually addressed
envelopes, conserving our forests and avoiding the shame of seeing these
expensive missives gathering dust in the corner of an office or lunch
room, why isn’t the information restricted to web page viewing?
A simple
broadcast e-mail will alert potential readers of the most recent copy
issuance and pointing them towards the appropriate URL.
In this
era of electronic messaging, let’s set an example for the rest
of government and industry to follow.
Maybe then
I will not be tasked with restricting soldier training costs due to
“lack of funds”.
Capt Ray Galliott
RTC-WA
Leeuwin Barracks, WA
Poor
timing
Just wondering
who the genius was who decided to promulgate new allowances for travel,
meals and postings to take effect on December 12, 2002 – right
in the middle of the posting period for 02/03.
After the
disaster DHA experienced last year and the flow-on problems for Defence
members, one would have thought that any changes to allowances would
take effect either before or after such an intense movements period.
Now DHA
are left to sort out how to pay the new rates and how many days individuals
will be entitled to, especially if their travel period is split by the
date of effect.
Defence
members will now deal with the angst of seeing their mate next door
paid more disturbance allowance and maybe more in travel rates because
he moved two days later than they did.
We will
also be left wondering when we will see any adustments and whether they
are accurate. Well done.
Sgt Darryl King
103 Sig Sqn
Lavarack Barracks, QLD
Sue
Parr, Director-General, Personnel Policy and Employment Conditions,
replies:
Sergeant King raises the issue of the timing of increases to relocation
allowances for the ADF at a time when a lot of posting activity is taking
place.
These allowances
are based on external data including surveys of costs that members are
likely to face.
As the
delegate, I am responsible for reflecting this data into our allowances,
and in doing this, balance the workload of administrators against the
individual member who will be incurring the increased costs.
While it
may have been easier for administrators for any increases to apply after
the posting cycle my priority was to provide increases to the allowances
as soon as practicable after I became aware of the eternal data, particularly
because of the high number of people affected.
Administrators
in both CSIG and DHA were consulted before the date of effect was set
to ensure that they were prepared for the change.
Adjustments
to any payments made incorrectly at the lower rates will be paid after
the peak posting period is over, or during any acquittal.
With any
increase there will always be a date of effect, and some people will
fall on either side.
Thanks
for travel
On behalf
of my family and I, I would like to thank all the people in Timor and
Australia who assisted with our movements to Melbourne for my father’s
funeral.
Your understanding
and support were greatly appreciated.
Cpl A. Fitzmaurice
MGI Det COMD
AUSBATT VII
Calling
3 MG Bn
I am the
eldest son of a deceased veteran of 33rd Bn, 1st AIF who served on the
Western Front and later with the 3rd MG Bn in France.
The history
of the 33rd Bn is very well documented but I have been unable to trace
any history of 3 MG Bn.
Would any
reader know of any documentation relating to the 3 MG Bn and their operations
in France?
Should
any publications or source exist, please contact the undersigned.
Thank you.
Jim Bradridge
PO Box 1076
Townsville, QLD 4810
Why
reward civvies?
I wish
to know why in Bouganville civilian monitors (public servants) receive
up to $50 more a day then a Defence member, as well as after 90 days
in country they receive their pay tax free, which is also back-dated
the 90 days.
I also
believe that they are now getting the ASM – if the Government wishes
to reward them, there should be a separate medal for public servants.
As you
can see, their conditions of service are different so why should they
receive the same reward as a Defence member?
Sgt P. Falconer
AT PMG
Bougainville
Poor
quality video
A response
just received from ComSuper advised that the cost of producing the “Military
Super Quiz” video was not financed from the fund.
While this
is reassuring, I feel it does not detract from the poor quality of the
production.
The response
acknowledged that the video would appeal to some members and not others.
As mine
was the only complaint received to date, I would encourage any member
who found it appealing to express your praise through the Military Super
web site.
Sgt A. Godwin
HQ 1ATS
RAAF Richmond, NSW
Don’t
point fingers
Was it
really necessary to have the life size WO1 Smith pointing at us and
the general public from the front page of Edition 1066 of Army?
Yes, I
know, it’s really important stuff and the vast majority of Army
applauds the zero tolerance policy adopted by Defence with regards to
harassment and discrimination – but it shouldn’t have been
on the front page.
All “HANDS
OFF” achieves is to leave a rather sour taste in the mouth of those
members of the public who may read the paper and come away with two
words in their mind –Army and Sexual Offences.
Coupled
with the photograph on the back with the “brave” female swimmer
at the 3 Bde swimming carnival, the article does nothing for the Army’s
largely undeserved reputation throughout the wider community as a chauvinistic,
testosterone-riven dinosaur stuck in the 1850s.
I’m
sure the idea was to engender quite the opposite response (that Army
was serious about stamping out harassment and discrimination); but it
failed.
There are
a lot of “feel-good” stories about Army at the moment –
so why not use them.
Perhaps
a little more diplomacy and a litle less of WO1 Smith’s finger
pointing would be a lot wiser and a bit more people-friendly.
Capt Paul Graham
Liaison Officer, Victorian Committee
Defence Reserves Support Council
Editor’s
Reply:
I disagree
with your interpretation of the story and its presentation. The message
was clear and unambiguous to the readership that matters – the
soldiers.
The picture
of WO1 Shannon Smith was meant to convey the warning that the Army will
not condone behaviour which leads to offences.
Although
the story clearly stated the number of offences had dropped, it would
be better if none occurred – therefore, WO1 Smith was a visual
reminder of the intent to prevent sexual offences.
In my view,
any member of the public who saw the photo would have seen it as the
Army being proactive on a serious issue.
An army
stuck in the 1850s would not consider publishing information on sexual
harassment statistics.
I am proud
to say that our editorial policy of not being afraid to confront difficult
issues within the Army, such as warning soldiers of the dangers of steriod
usage, is supported by the CA, Lt-Gen Peter Leahy, who sees the Army
newspaper as the key communication tool for the Army.
Find
right target
In reply
to Sgt Scott’s letter of December 19, may I say that, you are quite
right, Sergeant, I have done informal school tours, organised by the
CO of the unit with which I was serving at the time.
They proved
an immensely popular activity for the little tackers involved, but they
were no substitute for professional, roving display teams, and that
was the whole point of my argument.
Entertaining
kids in the playground with cam cream and rat packs might have a positive
spin off a few years down the track when the kids in question graduate
from high school, although I doubt it.
Like any
form of advertising, Defence’s spiel has to be focused at a target
audience, it has to be aimed at both short and long-term returns, and
it has to be delivered by people who know what they are talking about.
I was joking
about pub recruiting, just in case anyone out there thinks I was serious.
Most of the diggers I know would not stay either sober or vertical long
enough to deliver a coherent recruiting spiel if you let ‘em loose
in a pub with a handful of the Queen’s shillings!
Just a
last parting thought, if we don’t stick up for professional standards,
both within Defence and in our relations with the media, then who will?
Maintaining
a dignified silence, as you put it, plays into the hands of those who
would reduce us to gender-neutral, politically correct nonentities.
LCpl J.J. Gardner
126 Cdo Sig Sqn
4RAR (Cdo)
Holsworthy, NSW
Confused
by CSA
I am seeking
some assistance and guidance.
The background
of my case is, I am separated (divorced) from my wife and I am currently
paying Child Support.
I am currently
accommodated through RA, but the Child Support Agency (CSA) has recently
made a determination that the RA payment as being a component of my
actual income.
This basically
means that my wage has increased approximately $12,000 per annum.
This determination
from the CSA is apparently driven from their own legislation and not
from the ATO legislation.
Confused?
I know that I am in regard to this.
It also
leads to the question, “if this determination has been made in
this instance, how many other serving members in the same situation
will be forced to pay more Child Support for a Defence entitlement?”
It would
also raise further questions as to separated/divorced members who have
MWD status in a DHA allocated home, as this is also subsidised.
As I indicated
above, it will place considerable pressure on numerous members of the
ADF and could/will cause problems for them and the ADF.
I am hoping
that you could look into this and see if there is something that Defence
can do to alleviate this situation as it is going to kill off another
condition of service that assists in the retention of ADF personnel.
Cpl Stephen Scanlon
3RAR
Holsworthy, NSW
Sheila
Bird, Assistant General Manager, Child Support Agency, replies:
For privacy reasons the Child Support Agency can’t discuss individual
cases.
For the
benefit of your other readers, though, I would like to confirm that
Rent Allowance, like other forms of housing assistance available to
Defence members, is not a reportable allowance under the fringe benefits
reporting requirements.
Therefore
it is not included as part of a person’s taxable income when child
support liability is calculated.
However,
where there are special circumstances either parent can apply to CSA
for a change of assessment.
In such
cases, some benefits and allowances can be taken into account in the
reassessment, but any expenses relating to those allowances will also
be taken into account.
CSA realises
that life in the ADF is unique. That’s why we have been working
closely with organisations such as the Defence Community Organisation
(DCO) and Defence Families Australia to ensure we balance the special
needs of service personnel with the requirements of the Child Support
Scheme.
In mid-2000
CSA and DCO ran a very successful pilot scheme at Puckapunyal to better
support separated parents and to assist DCO in helping parents with
their child support cases.
We have
built on those experiences and now provide information sessions and
guest speakers at Randwick, Singleton and RAAF Base Williamtown, with
sessions in other areas to follow soon.
Also, early
next year CSA and DCO will pilot another project, at RAAF Base Williamtown,
aimed at helping separated parents stay connected with their kids.
Ultimately
though, CSA’s responsibility is to ensure that parents meet their
obligations to their children.
If a Defence
member has any questions on the Child Support Scheme and how it is administered,
they can log-on to the CSA website (www.csa.gov.au) where they can view
The Guide, our new online legal resource. It is an easy-to-read interactive
document that outlines, among other things, how child support is assessed.
Alternatively,
they can contact one of our client service officers on 13 12 72.
Editor’s
Note: Army would like to thank Cpl Scanlon for raising this issue
and the CSA for its quick action and reply.
Bushfire
Appeal
In the
recent Canberra bushfires, Army veteran Mark Graham lost his house and
possessions. Among his losses was his military badge collection. Could
any reader who has any spare badges and would be willing to donate them,
please send them to DCoord-A, R1-4-B002, Russell Offices, Canberra ACT,
2600
Donations
to the Canberra Bushfire Recovery Appeal can be made on line
at www.canberraconnect.act.gov.au
or by phoning (02) 6230 0498
|
