Letters to the Editor

Why soldiers are leaving
Spitting chips over shoe change
Posting to nowhere
Look it up on the DRN: we'd like to

How to write to Army News

Why soldiers are leaving

I READ with ironic interest the article entitled "The need to leave the Army" [Edition 1108, October 21].

The low leaving rates in senior officers and NCOs is purely self-inflicted, as is the high rate of attrition of younger soldiers. Why? MSBS and civilianising of Army skills and training and benefits.

In the past soldiers on DFRDB could look forward to a good career in the forces, and, on completion of 20 years' service, leave with a good pension while still young enough to start another career or enter semi-retirement. However, currently under MSBS, a senior soldier who has completed 20 years is not able to touch money locked into the superannuation scheme until he or she turns 55. The scheme seems to be subject to change at the drop of a hat and has not performed well in the last few years.

Younger soldiers are frustrated by the lack of promotion prospects and minimal incentive to stay on and do their 20. They are encouraged to leave the Army on completion of their ROSO by the civilian recognition of their skills and a perceived better deal outside the Army.

This civil recognition, while benefiting the individual soldier, has a negative impact on the quality of training received by soldiers. In many of the service corps, soldiers are trained by civilians; sometimes the only military person they might have contact with is the Wing SSM. They are assessed by civilians and taught skills that are only useful in a civilian workplace. On completion of their training they need to be taught how to operate in a military environment by their gaining units and then find, after up to three years of expensive training, that they really don't like the Army and want to get out.

A year's pay at a high rate of tax for an extra five years' service, as promised by MSBS retention benefit, does not compensate for a pension for life. This is compounded by the stigma of having to pay back the money at the full untaxed rate if a better deal presents itself.

I understand that in this modern world of bean-counters and rights of the individual, the Army needs to look to the hip pocket. It is also apparent the Army is shooting itself in the foot if it thinks the policy of economic rationalisation at the expense of the soldier is better than a well-trained experienced member who wants to stay in and pass on his or her knowledge. A soldier is not a public servant in uniform, but a member of the Defence force doing their duty for the country and should be treated as such.

Cpl M. Panasewycz
SASR Campbell Barracks

Col Trevor Lloyd, Director Retention Policy, DPE, replies:

CPL Panasewycz's letter raised some issues about the way those doing their duty for their country are treated.

Probably the best way to respond to the issues is to reflect on the balances that the senior personnel officers in Canberra make between often conflicting requirements. How do you attract sufficient numbers of the right people to the services, retain the right number at the right rank and skill level, separate them from the services in a manner that is fair both to the individual and to the wider Australian community, and keep them on hand as reserve members to help out in times of crisis? Do not forget that there is also a requirement to conform to legislation.

We in the services have managed to get things reasonably right. I would give the ADF a mark of 80-85 per cent over the past 10 years.

Let's deal with recruitment, or in HR jargon, the job offer. Across all the services and avenues of entry the job offer needs to be sufficiently attractive to the sorts of quality applicants we want. The skills and training we offer is arguably the best around, but we need to describe it in a language the civilian community understands - not the sort of cryptic jargon you and I often communicate in. Many of the equipmentspecific skills we teach are unique - check out your unit armourer's training. Consequently, our training system and standards have moved to describe the skills and training in a language the wider community understands. When members separate, their ability to show prospective employers the training and competencies they have earned is invaluable.

Now to the thorny issue of DFRDB and MSBS - and remember I need to avoid the pitfalls of offering financial advice. Let's just settle for the facts that each scheme had or has merits but it is now 2005, legislation has changed, national accounting standards and policies have changed, and governments have come and gone. I am sorry that Cpl Panasewycz's particular financial and personal circumstances and point of view may prefer the old DFRDB scheme, but the MSBS scheme is right, perhaps not completely right, but nevertheless right for the times. Its faults can and are tweaked from time to time.

The national objective is to save for retirement, not to fund a particular circumstance or lifestyle change at an arbitrary 20- year mark. Neither should we confuse the intent of MSBS superannuation with retention incentives. Finally, I agree that a soldier is not a public servant in uniform. But, at the same time, I would like to pay tribute to the public servants who serve in many different ways - perhaps as teachers in outback schools, as police maintaining the rule of law, or as department heads guiding national financial policy and administration: they, too, serve.

TOP

Spitting chips over shoe change

I WAS shocked to learn the art of spit polishing shoes is to be lost from the Army [Edition 1114, February 24].

As a former soldier, I recall many fond memories - especially as a new recruit - sitting around the barracks with fellow soldiers spit polishing our shoes and testing our knowledge of the lessons taught to us from that day. This was not only beneficial to improving our skills as soldiers, but also helped us establish espirit de corps and formed friendships that have lasted many years.

While I appreciate that times change, things such as learning the art of spit polishing shoes are a time-honoured tradition important to teaching soldiers to take pride in their uniform and their appearance. I will always be proud when I look over my past photos that the time and effort I put into my uniform (especially my footwear) was worth the effort.

Chris Childs
ex-Cfn 4 Fd Regt

TOP

Posting to nowhere

I AM writing in regards to communication, or lack thereof, between various departments in Defence in regards to postings/positions.

What department messed this one up?

I was offered a long-term overseas posting in May- June 2004 and the posting was confirmed in an interview with my career manager in September.

I received the posting order on October 1 and continued making all the preparations required, including leave, security, removals, bank accounts, medical and, most importantly, telling my son I would be leaving, purposely waiting until I received the posting order.

Three days later I received a posting package from the Overseas Admin Cell and I commenced the completion of their paperwork. On October 11 my career manager informed me the position had been disbanded and the posting cancelled.

I do not blame SCMA or Overseas Admin Cell as all indications show they were not aware the position had been disbanded. However, I believe these decisions are not made overnight, and there is a department within Defence that knew there was no position available.

Considering the timeframe from when the offer was made and when I received the posting order, it seems there was plenty of time to keep appropriate agencies informed of future intentions.

I was disappointed the posting was cancelled, as would many other people in the same situation; as usual, I will soldier on. However, this lack of communication meant various agencies (both civil and military) and myself began the preparations required for the overseas long-term posting only to be informed all the efforts had been wasted and cancellation arrangements had to be made. I have always been told "do not believe you are posted until you receive a posting order". This is a saying that we all may have to rethink.

Sgt Wayne Robinson
2 HSB Brisbane

Brig P.B. Symon, Director General Pacific International Policy Division, replies:

I am responding to Sgt Wayne Robinson's letter in relation to his posting order for a position in PNG that was subsequently cancelled. I wish to express my regret for this and apologise for the inconvenience it has caused Sgt Robinson and his family.

In researching what went wrong I have found that in April 2002 a full review was done of all Defence Cooperation Program positions.

Under pressure to reduce the number of overseas positions, International Policy Division was required to decide which positions to disestablish. This difficult task was made worse because of poor administrative procedures from International Policy Division to SCMA. In this case, the fault lies squarely with the originator.

Since commencing my appointment as Director- General Pacific in January, I have reviewed posting procedures for Defence staff in the Pacific. In particular, I have written to the personnel agency heads in all three services seeking their assistance to ensure Pacific Branch is consulted prior to action being taken in relation to posting orders. In turn, my staff have a much better appreciation of the personal impact of poor administrative procedures. I intend to do everything I can to ensure this sort of personal upheaval doesn't stem from International Policy Division again.

TOP

Look it up on the DRN: we'd like to

THE Melbourne office of Defence Force Recruiting moved nine months ago from Defence Plaza to a new building located a significant distance from the nearest Defence facilities.

Promises were made that the move would not stop military members from being able to access the DRN and, for positions such as CCLK, complete essential administration for the unit and its personnel.

However, March 2005 still sees Defence Force Recruiting (Melbourne) no closer to having the promised access.

As a result, personnel administration takes longer to complete and frequent trips are required to Defence Plaza or Victoria Barracks to obtain the required paperwork.

It is not a very smart way to conduct business, nor does it result in military personnel using their time as effectively as possible. Frequently, when dealing with other ADF agencies, we are told to "look it up on the DRN", yet we do not have access to this valuable resource that is necessary to complete many of our daily tasks and taken for granted by most other uniformed members.

Capt Dennis Maddock
RAEME Defence Force Recruiting

Air-Cdre Lee Roberts, Director General Workforce Planning, Recruitment and Retention, replies:

I share your concern. DRN access for ADF members in Defence Force Recruiting is one of my priorities.

The requirement was in the project plan and funding was allocated. Unfortunately, delivery of the technical side is always more difficult than expected. Enhanced security requirements have delayed roll-out in many areas.

A trial installation is due for completion in Canberra by the end of March following which we will advise you of an implementation date in Melbourne.

TOP

HOW TO WRITE TO ARMY NEWS

It is the right of all soldiers to correspond with Army. Soldiers wishing to air their views through letters to the editor have access to the newspaper without using the chain of command.

Letters will be edited for spelling and grammatical errors and newspaper style, and may be edited for space.

Preference is given to typed letters of fewer than 300 words. Letters will be rejected where they are too long, abusive, cover a subject that has been exhausted or can be answered in the author's unit.

They will be published only when they include the author's name, unit (where applicable), location and contact number.

Send letters to: The Editor, Army Newspaper, R8-LG-029, Russell Offices, Dept of Defence, Canberra, ACT 2600; fax (02) 6265 6690 or e-mail: armynews@defencenews.gov.au (Please note this is not an internal e-mail address and therefore requires Sec: Unclassified in the subject line when sending from a DRN terminal)

The opinions expressed in letters to the editor do not represent the views of the editor or the Army.