JOINT SUBMISSION BY THE RETURNED AND SERVICES LEAGUE OF AUSTRALIA
& THE REGULAR DEFENCE FORCE WELFARE ASSOCIATION

 Defence Force Remuneration Tribunal
Matter No 2 of 2003
Remuneration Reform Project
Blocks 5 & 6 21 May 2005

 Executive Summary

The RSL & RDFWA are able to offer qualified support to the principles and concepts embodied within the further Defence Submission on Matter No 2 of 2003 Remuneration Reform Project Blocks 5 & 6 dated 24 May 2005.

The RSL & RDFWA recommend that the Defence Force Remuneration Tribunal:

 Note the RSL and RDFWA view that:

•  The proposed arrangements for the placement of W01 and use of Pay Groups 1 & 2 appear consistent with RRP principles but are so bound by caveats as to preclude an informed final judgment.

• On the evidence presented it is possible that the application of the broad principles may lead to the inadvertent construction of an inappropriate and inequitable incentive to unwanted separation from the Service at the W01 level.

• The absence of more definitive Defence advice in relation to RRP Blocks 4, 5 & 6 calls into question the practicability of the theoretical constructs being proposed. Hopefully, Defence's intention to address the Tribunal's and other queries in the next few weeks will address these concerns.

• It is pleasing to note the reported favourable response to the RRP initiatives during the Tribunal's recent inspections but the absence of any evidence of the wider acceptability of the constructs and their likely practical impacts on ADF members remains a matter of some concern.

****************************************

Introduction

1. May it please the Tribunal the RSL & RDFWA wish to make a joint submission in relation to Matter No 2 /2003 - Remuneration Reform Project Blocks 5 & 6 dated 24 May 2005.

2. The RSL & RDFWA note the significance of the broad principles and concepts embodied within the Defence submission and note their importance to the future of ADF remuneration.

Background

3. The RSL & RDFWA take this opportunity to thank the ADF for their cooperation in briefing our organisations on their intended methodologies and the broad principles and concepts embodied within their submission, to the extent that they are defined.

The Proposed Placement of Warrant Officers 1

4. The basic proposal as to placement of WO1 is so bound by caveats, principally the foreshadowed employment review, as to preclude definite judgement. Placement in the Graded Officers Structure is conceded as being perhaps 'ultimately problematic'. Placement within the Other Ranks Structure is similarly bounded by a degree of uncertainty.

5. The RSL & RDFWA in commenting upon the RRP Block 4 proposals on O6 - O8 Officers highlighted that the practical effect of the proposals might be to engineer unintended incentives for separation. Such an outcome might well occur at the WO1 level unless the practical application is carefully handled.

Usage of Pay groups 1 & 2

6. The Defence proposals as to the intended usage of Pay Groups 1 & 2 represent little more than a statement of the obvious flowing from the philosophy of having such groups below Pay Group 3.

Uncertainties on RRP Blocks 4, 5 & 6

7. As evidenced in the Defence submission certain Tribunal queries as to RRP Block 4 issues remain to be resolved. The submissions before you today add to matters requiring greater definition.

8. It might well be that the broad philosophy of a 'Graded Pay Structure' is butting the uncertainties of practical application. The RSL & RDFWA have difficulty in forming a view on the merits or otherwise of the RRP proposals in the absence of more definitive practical information. However, Defence's intention to address these queries in the next few weeks is a hopeful sign, which we would encourage.

Communication Program

9. As has been commented upon in prior submissions by many parties, a communication program to members of the ADF is of importance. The RSL & RDFWA are pleased that the reported response to RRP during the Tribunal's recent inspection was so positive. The issue needs to be openly discussed, debated and subjected to the 'real world' if an informed judgement is to be made.

Conclusion

10. The RSL & RDFWA are able to offer qualified support to the principles and concepts embodied within the further Defence Submission on Matter No 2 of 2003 Remuneration Reform Project Blocks 5 & 6 dated 24 May 2005.

Recommendation

11.  The RSL & RDFWA recommend that the Defence Force Remuneration Tribunal:

 Note the RSL and RDFWA view that:

• The proposed arrangements for the placement of W01 and use of Pay Groups 1 & 2 appear consistent with RRP principles but are so bound by caveats as to preclude an informed final judgment.

• On the evidence presented it is possible that the application of the broad principles may lead to the inadvertent construction of an inappropriate and inequitable incentive to unwanted separation from the Service at the W01 level.

• The absence of more definitive Defence advice in relation to RRP Blocks 4, 5 & 6 calls into question the practicability of the theoretical constructs being proposed. Hopefully, Defence's intention to address the Tribunal's and other queries in the next few weeks will address these concerns.

• It is pleasing to note the reported favourable response to the RRP initiatives during the Tribunal's recent inspections but the absence of any evidence of the wider acceptability of the constructs and their likely practical impacts on ADF members remains a matter of some concern.

Group Captain Phil Morrall, AM, CSC (Retd)
Vice President Pay & Conditions of Service

Camaraderie Vol 36, No 2, p9-11