|
|
|
|
 |
||
 |
| |
| Letters |
Postcard from... Postcard from ... is a new feature that enables readers to share a postcard to keep in touch with family members or mates. If you would like to include a postcard in the paper, email a 50-100 word note and accompanying photo to armynews@defencenews.gov.au. This first postcard, as so often happens with postcards, coincides with the arrival home of the recipient as WO2 Jock Douglas and other 1RTF members arrived home this month. |
| Diggers miss out on awards again I’M disappointed yet again that honours for anyone below the rank of sergeant were almost non-existent in this year’s Australia Day honours. Didn’t the RSM-A last year state that soldiers have to be nominated for awards and pushed up the chain of command? I’ll be blunt: you want soldiers to stay in, well how about some kudos for us? Remove the people who received awards for operations and you have no-one below the rank of WO2. There are many deserving people out there who are either overlooked or given something in lieu (ie courses) as it must be too much hard work to nominate soldiers for these awards. I haven’t even seen a bronze, silver, or gold commendation given out in recent times. Soldiers’ medallions have become a running joke, being called the lucky dip as 50 per cent of soldiers’ peers disagree with the recipient. Seems to me and just about everybody I know (and that’s a lot of people due to my time in) that awards are an after thought or a last-minute thing. Again I’m disappointed and annoyed – even after the RSM-A’s comments last year, here we are again. It’s not good enough. Cpl David Joliffe School of Infantry Lone Pine Barracks I WAS astonished to notice the favouritism in the Australia Day awards. I note six brigadiers, six colonels, 10 lieutenant colonels, five majors, two captains, one chaplain, five WO1s, four WO2s and five corporals received medals and awards. Are there not lance corporals and privates that slug it out as well, normally at the sharp end, who are due rewards as well? Pte Paul Carolan 11/28RWAR Irwin Barracks WO Kevin Woods, RSM-A, responds: I WOULD reiterate my answer to a similar question last year: soldiers who believe someone at the junior level deserves recognition should ask their CO or RSM to nominate that person. I think it’s worth reminding soldiers how the process works – again, I’ll use the battalion as an example. Members are normally nominated at the unit level, their nominations then work their way up through the chain of command, through Bde HQ to DJFHQ where a similar committee will select the most deserving. They are then forwarded to LHQ where another committee will select the most deserving nominations from Land Command units. They are then sent to DGPers-A at AHQ. Each nomination is taken on its merit regardless of rank, trade, corps or gender. The nominations that don’t make it past the various levels are either considered for a commendation or are passed back down the chain for later resubmission if still considered worthy. The Army Honours an Awards Committee – a brigadier, three colonels, myself and a secretary – meets twice a year to select Army members considered worthy to be nominated for either the Queen’s birthday or Australia Day honours list. Members that meet the strict criteria are selected by the committee and presented to CA for approval. |
| More promotion incentive needed LIKE most members of the Army who have proven their commitment to Defence through long service and career progression, I am annoyed that the government is using a band-aid measure to retain junior members. The provision of a retention benefit for members who have served minimal time purely to allow government KPIs for personnel numbers to be met is an insult to any member who has already shown their commitment. I understand that retaining members at certain rank levels is important and hard to achieve, however, instead of paying a blanket retention benefit to those members it would make more sense to provide junior members with real incentive to achieve higher positions. This could have been achieved by paying a promotion bonus and increasing wages for more senior positions. Where is the incentive for a sergeant, who with the retention benefit is earning the same amount as a warrant officer, to do courses, be promoted and take on greater responsibility? If that member was to be promoted to warrant officer there would be no bonus paid and the promotion would attract a 12-month return of service obligation. Call me crazy but that sounds like performance punishment. A parting thought, the best retention incentive we ever had was DFRDB. WO1 Tony Mackay Land Systems Division, DMO Victoria Barracks. Victoria |
| Too much paperwork I AM writing in reference to the enormous amount of administrative paperwork requiring completion before a deployment. I suggest standardising DP1 folders across Army, and completing administrative tasks such as official passports and security clearances, before entry into a frontline unit. Before I deployed with 1RTF, my third operation with my battalion, many of these issues were a common theme. With the high operational tempo Army wide, and the amount of members (increasingly junior) being deployed, a standard DP1 folder, similar to a CLB folder, would cut down the administrative workload of officers, NCOs and soldiers when training and family time is short. As most units in the Army keep these folders anyway, this would simply standardise the administrative processes before deployment and complement AIRN requirements. Increasingly, my unit has been supplemented by, or has supplemented, external units on operations in the recent past. In addition, many soldiers deploying in some sub-units have been out of their IET courses for less than one year. This significantly reduces time available for training as official passport applications are completed, competencies are investigated, security clearances are applied for etc. With soldiers marching out of IET courses cleared only to restricted level, with no official passport, not AIRN compliant and in some cases a foreign citizen, the administrative burden on a unit preparing for operations is intense. With these processes being part of criteria to be employed in a frontline unit, and a DP1 folder carried to back it up, these issues could be resolved. In the environment of battle-grouping and combat-teaming, the differing administrative requirements, readiness levels and internal processes across Army lead to issues when members from a Townsville unit, for example, march in to a Darwin-based unit at short notice. With a standard DP1 folder, with certified copies of all relevant documentation, complemented with an AIRN printout, there can be no confusion, and better training can be conducted in those crucial weeks before deployment. This idea could be put into practice with a minimum of effort – simply the design of a folder and the striking of a DI(A). LCpl Scott Stone 7RAR Robertson Barracks |
| Opportunity for operators ECN 270 Plant Operator is a designated critical employment category identified for the retention scheme. What a great scheme, and what a perfect note to highlight an opportunity to enhance Army’s capability through implementing the spirit and intention of the Hardened and Networked Army. Let’s support ARes members completing the basic plant course at SME, or offer a modified ARes plant operator course. Let’s assist civil coded plant operators having codes easily recognised without unnecessary process. Currently a civilian-coded operator must complete a single code plant course before trade testing of civilian codes. ARes single code courses are scarce when qualified operators (being a critical employment category) are a limited resource, so why not just trade test up front? I have civil-coded operators who for a variety of reasons haven’t completed a military course and cannot be fully utilised. These blokes are willing, civilian qualified and experienced, but lack a streamlined system to obtain a military licence. Those few with military codes regularly deploy in support of civil bushfire-fighting efforts. The chance to support AACAP, disaster relief, or deploy on operations would be welcomed. Let’s recognise valuable, civilian-gained qualifications and experience, and utilise this resource to Army’s full advantage. I am sure there are other examples. Capt Wade Morris 8CER Newcastle, NSW |
| Keen to add more rosettes AS I commence my 29th year in the Army I reflect on very positive experiences, good times and great mates. Of course medals are not a singular measure of our worth or achievement but it is disappointing that I can’t add further rosettes to my DFSM. Like many I chose to keep the DFSM in 1998 instead of changing to the DLSM – couldn’t part with it after 21 years ARA. I agree that introduction of the DLSM, for those that chose to change to it, did allow recognition of service that would have gone unrecognised when individuals moved between Regular and Reserve forces. Am I stuck with the results of my decision or do others feel as I do, that we should be able to add our GRes service, in the form of rosettes, to our DFSMs? One Army? Maj Ken Lilley Australian Army Malaria Institute Gallipoli Barracks |
Removals policy gap
To my mind, it would appear to be good leadership to take care of our serving members, and show them that while they may be experiencing family issues, the wider Defence family is taking care of them. |
