The Future of the Army Reserve - Discuss

[trellheim]

Some points from the Minister's replies which I thought relevant from yesterday.

he Minister referred to pay negotiations. I have proposed to the House that members of the Defence Forces should be allowed at least associate membership of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions in order that they have an input into pay negotiations. Is the Minister prepared to concede that?
Deputy Simon Coveney: No, I am not prepared to concede that. The Defence Forces are different from other organisations and public sector roles. When one signs up for the Defence Forces, one is signing up to a life defending the State and this is accompanied by certain rights and responsibilities. I am not willing to concede that at the moment, but certainly there are channels within the Defence Forces through which people can raise issues. Arbitration is also available in the Defence Forces. The Government's decision in September 2012 and the review of allowances and premium payments conducted by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform recognise there is a structural weakness in the way members of the Defence Forces are paid, and a decision was made to conduct a full review of overall pay structures and pay systems in the Defence Forces in the medium term. It is my intention that such a review will take place subsequent to the review of the security duty allowance and technical pay which is under way. That is proof we are investigating the matter with a view to making improvements but we must also recognise that the Defence Forces are somewhat different from other organisations in the public sector.

Arbitration is also available in the Defence Force

I am so happy to hear that, can he give a date when RDFRA can engage with the C&A scheme ?


..... later....

Deputy Simon Coveney: I take seriously my duty of care to Defence Forces personnel. In regard to basic pay, the only pay agreement for which this Government is responsible is the Haddington Road agreement. There was no cut to basic pay for enlisted Defence Forces personnel under that agreement. I will not go into previous pay deals or decisions previous Governments were forced to take. That is our record. We have also recognised the need to review some of the elements of pay and remuneration in the Defence Forces, and we are proceeding with that. I take the Deputy's point and, on the basis of the review, I will have a credible set of recommendations on which to act. When we get the recommendations we can bring them before the House for discussion and, hopefully, the Government will be in a position to act on them.

There was no cut to basic pay for enlisted Defence Forces personnel

This is a falsehood. Enlisted RDF had a straight 10% cut with zero opportunity to respond.



Re effective strength and female participation

Minister for Defence (Deputy Simon Coveney):
The strength of the Permanent Defence Force (PDF) at 30 September 2014, the latest date for which figures are available, is 9,200 of which 556 (6.04%) are female.
The effective strength of the Reserve Defence Force (RDF) for the same date is 2,383, of which 361 (15.15%) are female

The RDF strength excludes noneffectives so we are at 2383 .... I would even knock 40% off that to be much more realistic.

[DeV]

According to the VFM the RDF cost €23.4m. That includes 305 cadre and an average of 10 mandays for 2788 personnel.

By my estimation (based on the VFM) we could provide 4000 RDF personnel with 14 mandays, a grat of €500 each, pay for PDF in addition personnel, increased training activity (while getting rid of units outside barracks, grant in aid, D RDF and the FLR). While also taking account of increase PDF location utility costs etc.

For how much? €11.5 million

[holdfast]

The reality is the 11.5million is not there. Everything has to be in terms of the existing budget.

[DeV]

The reality is the 11.5million is not there. Everything has to be in terms of the existing budget.

Depends what the existing budget is because I would serious question the VFM figures (some eg clothing are left out, others eg utilities in PDF posts are guessed) it is also based on full manning (which we will never have).

However, that is what they published. It would mean a 50% in the 2012 figures, over 50% cut in RDF 2005 establishment but an RDF that is at least twice as well trained and effective.

With the SFC it will actually be even harder to cost

[Fridge Magnet]

Lads, I thought Cadre staff were done away with? Is that not the case?

[DeV]

Lads, I thought Cadre staff were done away with? Is that not the case?

Yes (apart from units outside barracks)

However the VFM calculated their pay (probably correctly IMHO) as part of the spend on the RDF

[F_M]

Lads, I thought Cadre staff were done away with? Is that not the case?

By and large, yes.
There are still people detailed to fulfil that role but without the additional allowance and other perks and benefits.

[Truck Driver]

Lads, I thought Cadre staff were done away with? Is that not the case?

Still are Cadre staff at the 16 designated non permanent manned RDF posts

[trellheim]

Is a crisis developing in the RDF ? Should all ranks above Cpl be limited to 3 years for occupation of a post/advertisement of a vacancy. After 3 years you go back on a General List or transfer, you can reapply for your job in open competition. Need to get a lot of people moving round the houses again fairly soon. BSMs and CS for deffo. BSM in particular should = no. of Cols and serve the same time period ( and have the same fallback in rank too ) Enlisted need a road up as well.

Huge problem developing with blockers in certain areas. Not so bad with Lieutenants but it should be a 3 year stint as well. Where there is less than the number of Establishment this is fairly simple as only 1 applicant for a post means no competition but it does need to be advertised in RO's

[DeV]

Enforce the current regs (ie post to non effective list, 2 years n/eff and you're discharged)

Change the regs to enforce the KPIs & allow someone who is (say 6 month) on the non-effective list to hold an appointment

The time commitment, medical, fitness, retirements, natural wastage will sort it out

[trellheim]

No that is non-attendance. Not the same thing at all. I mean you can only hold a post for 3 years. We have a huge problem here and no-one wants to address it. I'd have no problem serving a 3 year stint and moving on. Career rotation; you get stale in a job otherwise or get too over protective. We have what, twice the number of Sgts as establishment and 7 BSMs but only 1 on Establishment ? Do you not think everyone should have a go at jobs or is it just hauling the ladder up.

NCOs need a road up to SNCO that doesn't take 20 years

[trellheim]

364 days to the end of the re-org.

[DeV]

No that is non-attendance. Not the same thing at all. I mean you can only hold a post for 3 years. We have a huge problem here and no-one wants to address it. I'd have no problem serving a 3 year stint and moving on. Career rotation; you get stale in a job otherwise or get too over protective. We have what, twice the number of Sgts as establishment and 7 BSMs but only 1 on Establishment ? Do you not think everyone should have a go at jobs or is it just hauling the ladder up.

NCOs need a road up to SNCO that doesn't take 20 years

Non-attendance is the major issue, there are units with either a lot of vacancies or attendance problems because not all the JNCOs are attending.

Every individual on the books of the RDF needs to be looked at
- have they completed the minimum hrs (as per R5) - if not post n/eff
- have they been found to be below DF medical standards - discharge (as per R5)

If on n/eff:
- are they still alive (I know of a case where someone was found on the n/eff list recently even though they had died while on the eff list (it had been published in ROs as well!))
- have they been n/eff for 2 years - discharge

[DeV]

No that is non-attendance. Not the same thing at all. I mean you can only hold a post for 3 years. We have a huge problem here and no-one wants to address it. I'd have no problem serving a 3 year stint and moving on. Career rotation; you get stale in a job otherwise or get too over protective. We have what, twice the number of Sgts as establishment and 7 BSMs but only 1 on Establishment ? Do you not think everyone should have a go at jobs or is it just hauling the ladder up.

NCOs need a road up to SNCO that doesn't take 20 years

How many of those who are over and above the establishment (and that are filling vacancies for that matter) have completed the min hours required (never mind the KPIs)?

What about the CS/Coy 2IC who is rotated from Bray to Letterkenny or Wexford to Clifden?

Or is it within Coys (how does the CS rotate?) or units (CS your being rotated from Skibbereen to Limerick?)??

[trellheim]

Its not rotation. You get to serve 3 years in the post and then its put up again for competition. We already have the geographic nature built into the regs , you can only apply if you live within xyz distance. So that other Sgt can do the platoon Sgt, that other CS can take on the CS role, that BSM can stand down. Officers this is actually very easy to do and in fact really should be built into the system already as it happens regularly in the PDF , transfer/transfer/transfer. Also a lot of people need to be rotated very regularly especially in centralized Bde/College environments .

I'm on my 3rd Unit flash and 4th Sub unit , it has to happen