Letters to the Editor

Ideal chance for reservists

Defence Travel Card a source of frustration

ORs deserve more

Some support for DHA

HOW TO GET A LETTER PUBLISHED

Ideal chance for reservists

ARES, specifically 2 Div, your time has come. With components of the ARA stretched across the globe, others preparing to deploy and now a stability and support operation in East Timor, your time to step up to the plate is here.

In the not too distant future, peace in Dili and surrounds will be restored.
Many question the value that the ARes provides Defence. Well here is your opportunity to prove your $950 million p.a. worth. Here is 2 Div’s chance to bring combat power to the fore.
In six months, if Army is still in East Timor, then you are well placed to assume full command of Op Astute and allow the ARA to focus on warfighting ops.

Of the 10,000-plus ARes pers, dispersed across 14-plus infantry battalions and associated combat, CS, CSS units and numerous formation headquarters, surely 2 Div can be entrusted with the forming, training, deployment and sustainment of an appropriate force to assume full operational responsibility of Op Astute.

If not, then it is evident that there is no place for the ARes in its present form in the current or future complex warfighting environment.
Maj A. Swinsburg
School of Inf
Singleton

Lt-Col Bruce Davis, SO1 Projects, DRes-A, responds:
IT IS pleasing to note that you reflect the enthusiasm of many reservists throughout Army, not just those in 2 Div, with regard to participation on operations.
Many reservists from 1 and 2 Divs and 17 Bde (until recently the LSF) are already proud of the service they have already provided to Army’s overseas deployments, many on more than one occasion.
Army has recently considered the potential of the Army Reserve within the Hardened and Networked Army and has given the Army Reserve a new role – to “provide specified individual and collective capabilities to support, sustain and reinforce Army’s operational forces.”

To the end of 2008, up to 1100 High Readiness Reserve positions have been funded by Government to form two Force Protection Company Groups (FPCG) and provide up to 700 individual and collective positions in 1 and 2 Divs and 17 Bde.

Another 1700 positions have then been funded from the beginning of 2009 to the end of 2012 for an additional four FPCG and 900 other positions within Army’s operational forces.
This is in addition to the domestic security capability provided to Army by the seven Reserve Response Forces and continued requests for operational support on operations by Active Reservists on CFTS.

TOP

Defence Travel Card a source of frustration

• AFTER spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on fraud awareness, including mandatory annual training, how could the Army introduce a system like the Defence Travel Card (DTC)?
  Fraud is 90 per cent opportunity, so why have we given so many of our people this opportunity?
  
  There have already been more than 40 investigations into misuse of the DTC – and the list is growing! 
  There are no credit checks prior to issue to member. Moreover, users (from privates to generals) are expected to gain an in-depth knowledge on not only usage, but data entry and reconciliation.
  Not surprisingly, data is often entered in error, increasing an already labour-intensive process.
  
  With the ongoing high tempo of Army, the time burden required alone strains this system toward the unworkable. More importantly, our duty of care must include not placing our people in a position of “possible self harm”. 
  Even after the online training, the DTC remains a confusing administrative nightmare that fails in our duty of care. 
  Capt Joe Lavery
  Adelaide Universities Regt
  Hampstead Barracks
  
  Michael Gahan, Director Business Management – Army, responds:
  MEMBERS of Army are expected to live the Army values, which embody integrity and trust.
  We trust our members to do the right thing and, given the very low rate of abuse of the travel card, Army members have not abused that trust.
  
  Training is available to all members in travel card use, but unfortunately the take up rate of that training is disappointing. Consequently, the Travel Reform Improvement Project is currently considering additional regional briefing sessions plus information articles to inform members of how to properly use the DTC.
  Training is available online on the CAMPUS, the Defence e-learning web site, on the Defence Travel Model, Travel Budget Calculator, Card Management System and Defence Travel Card. Member’s can assist in improving the administration of their card by undertaking the training.
  
  The introduction of the travel card forms part of the initiatives associated with demonstrating productivity improvements and savings to support the last Workplace Remuneration Review.
  The travel card has produced significant savings that have been reinvested in Defence. The introduction of the travel card has provided the opportunity for members to control and manage their travel needs..
  

TOP

ORs deserve more

AFTER scanning the new ADF pay rates, one glaring issue stood out; ORs are being ripped off. I was quite stunned at the differences in the pay scales between ORs and officers.
What will I receive after nearly 20 years’ service and striving to reach the pinnacle of my rank structure? $934.

Bewildered I did some quick comparisons to see how much an officer, having completed the same amount of service, would be entitled to – WO1 base salary is $58,989, unbelievably the base salary for majors for the same time frame is $69,089. Even more disturbing is the yearly incremental increases officers are entitled to. Lieutenants get a $4800 pay rise during their four years and captains experience an astounding $10,000 pay increase during their six years. Sergeants (in my trade) get $2500 and WO2s get $2700.
What possible incentive is there for someone to take on the most senior position available to them within the OR stream, to assume the vast increase in tasks and responsibilities?
There certainly isn’t any monetary incentive because a $900 pay rise is disgraceful.

No doubt some bright spark out there will respond with the ubiquitous “if you don’t like it, get out” or some representative from Pay and Conditions will spew forth some inane rhetoric extolling the virtues of the current system compared to civilian wages. But it’s not about my dissatisfaction about service within Army or about comparing our wages to civilians – this letter is attempting to articulate the ridiculous disparity in pay scales that exist between ORs and officers.

Even the position of RSM-A, the senior soldier within Army, is not considered highly enough to be on a wage comparable to an OC. How can Defence justify this decision? Why are our WO1 equivalents paid so little in comparison to the experience they bring to those positions?

More importantly, why are the pay rises within ORs so ridiculously small compared to the considerable increases experience by officers?
With all the discussions nowadays about retention within the ORs, it’s very easy to see how so many young soldiers become disillusioned by sub-standard pay rises as they progress through the ranks. (By the way, if you want a solution to combat the retention rates, then allow Defence members who have served 10 years or more to salary sacrifice their mortgages.)
As an aside, my wife received a $1500 bonus last year from a company she had been with for only 12 months. That makes the $934 look even more despicable, especially considering I’ve been with the same company for 19 years.
WO2 D. Harris
Perth

Will Van Weerdenburg, Assistant Director Industrial Policy, responds:
WO2 Harris has raised a number of important issues. Unfortunately there is not enough space to provide a full answer here.
I will try to address his core concerns: the different pay for ORs and officers, the pay differential between WO2 and WO1, and the lack of clear differentials between OR ranks. When I refer to officers’ pay, I am excluding specialist officers as they are paid differently.

ORs and officers are paid through quite different systems. Since 1978, OR pay has followed a graded structure. ORs are paid based on trade (the pay groups) as well as rank responsibilities (the increments).
Currently, officers and WO1s are paid on the Officers Common Scale. In this system, everyone with the same rank and seniority receives the same pay. Officers and WO1s are paid based on the command, leadership and management responsibilities associated with their rank.

These are fundamentally different systems and they are not formally linked. This gives rise to the differences noted by WO2 Harris.
The pay differential between WO2 and WO1 depends on what pay group the WO2 is in.

A WO2 is paid on the basis of trade as well as rank, and a WO1 is paid only on the basis of rank. This means a member in the highest WO2 pay group will see less difference on promotion than a WO2 in a lower pay group.

The example given by WO2 Harris is for a WO2 on Pay Group 7 (the highest paid). The most common pay group for WO2s is Pay Group 4. The differential between a Pay Group 4 WO2 and a WO1 is $3359 per year.

The ADF will soon change to a graded pay structure for officers and WO1s. Initially the qualification and skill elements of flying, submarine, special operations and special action forces allowances will be rolled-in to core pay.

This will establish a number of new pay grades. At first officers and WO1s will be placed into a pay group that pays the same as their previous core pay plus allowances. Over time, officer and WO1 employment groups will be moved to different pay groups to reflect their different work value. This will be a complex process and will take some time.
I share WO2 Harris’ concern about compression in pay between OR ranks.

A project team has been established to examine further reform of the OR pay structure. Issues such as pay compression between ranks are being examined as we work on a pay structure for ORs that meets the current and future needs of the ADF.

The project team intends to present a submission on the restructure of OR pay later this year. ADF members will be given more information as and when it becomes available.
For more details on RRP refer to the Pay and Conditions web site at http://intranet.defence.gov.au/pac or http://www.defence.gov.au/dpe/pac.

TOP

Some support for DHA

IN RESPONSE to Sgt Woodhall (Army, June 1), it seems that the problem is not DHA but actually his frustration at being relocated three times in three years – this in itself highlights a few concerns.
Most of what Sgt Woodall is complaining about is set by Defence in Pacman.

DHA does not have its own book of entitlements and it also relies on information given to it by Defence about members; this is a point I continually find myself explaining to members. Also DHA does not physically move, this is Toll’s job, so his letter should have referred to “incompetence with DHA and Toll”.

Personally my experiences with DHA have been good – not always perfect, but good.
WO2 Brett Neale
1 Armd Regt
Robertson Barracks

TOP

HOW TO GET A LETTER PUBLISHED

Preference is given to letters of fewer than 300 words. Letters will be rejected if they are too long, abusive or can be answered by the author's unit.

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

Send letters to: The Editor, Army newspaper, R8-LG-037, Russell Offices, Canberra, ACT 2600; or email: armynews@defencenews.gov.au