Restoration of RDF pay

[Bravo20]

Again, the most surprising thing for me is that this wasn't an issue for the RDFRA until now....

Should have been on the radar years ago.

To be honest until you raised it nobody here noticed that we were being underpaid.

I don't know what RDFRA's current relationship with C&A is like but I can tell how pay rates were communicated in the past. The DOD would simply email or post a copy of the rates they had agreed with PDFORRA and RACO (like the ones you provided the link to) and it was a take or leave it scenario.

That was fine when our pay was pegged to the PDF. Now that it has been separated, RDFRA needs to have its own pay negotiations talks. That or restore the parity.

[DeV]

In fairness, it’s probably take it or leave it for PDF as well except when they go to C&A on Allowances

[trellheim]

That was fine when our pay was pegged to the PDF. Now that it has been separated, RDFRA needs to have its own pay negotiations talks. That or restore the parity.

I believe it still is !

[Poiuyt]

To be honest until you raised it nobody here noticed that we were being underpaid.

So, what do RDFRA do? I would believe that pay would be one of the fundamental tasks of a union/representative association. I mean, I'm in a Union at work that would stage a countrywide shut down if they found 1 member was being paid 1 cent less than they should. Because pay is a fundamental task for Unions.

So what do RDFRA do?

[na grohmiti]

I thought from the outset the RDFRA were not permitted (by statute) to negotiate on matters relating to pay and operational matters.

[Poiuyt]

I thought from the outset the RDFRA were not permitted (by statute) to negotiate on matters relating to pay and operational matters.

Operational matters, yes, but that has never stopped them in the past.

Pay - rate of pay, yes, not being paid the right amount - No.

[Auldsod]

Operational matters, yes, but that has never stopped them in the past.

Pay - rate of pay, yes, not being paid the right amount - No.

Unless the lower rate is the 'right amount' according to the DoD.

I'll be interested to see where this goes anyway. I've heard nothing material back anyway.

[trellheim]

Pay is right in the centre of matters in scope for representation under Schedule II of S7

[DeV]

Well the issue has made it to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on .... Defence

[DeV]

The Department has been instructed by the Minister to “ensure the correct pay restoration is applied to both AR and NSR... to have this matter expedited as soon as possible I understand this is a matter of urgency”

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates...2019-06-13/14/




@Auldsod you have done the RDF some service .... thank you!

Any chance of you getting on the case of some other issues???

[Auldsod]

The Department has been instructed by the Minister to “ensure the correct pay restoration is applied to both AR and NSR... to have this matter expedited as soon as possible I understand this is a matter of urgency”

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates...2019-06-13/14/




@Auldsod you have done the RDF some service .... thank you!

Any chance of you getting on the case of some other issues???

It's not over until its actually been implimented. Highly doubt there will be anything back dated either.

I'll see if I can apply my calculator and excel spreadsheets to recruitment, paid training days and authorisation for reservists to go on foreign deployments!

[DeV]

Recruitment depends on the unit and formation, NSR have got it down to 44 days from close of applications to attestation (swearing in). Requires time and effort by PDF and RDF.

Mandays? RDF SSOs (Lt Cols/Comdt in Bde) have the power to sanction up to 28 days. Again effort required by RDF.

Overseas is prevented by law, requires the word Permanent to be deleted from the Defence Act

[Auldsod]

Recruitment depends on the unit and formation, NSR have got it down to 44 days from close of applications to attestation (swearing in). Requires time and effort by PDF and RDF.

Mandays? RDF SSOs (Lt Cols/Comdt in Bde) have the power to sanction up to 28 days. Again effort required by RDF.

Overseas is prevented by law, requires the word Permanent to be deleted from the Defence Act

I was making my comment in jest! Just articulating that the issues above won't be solved so easily with a bit of calculation!

[DeV]

I was making my comment in jest! Just articulating that the issues above won't be solved so easily with a bit of calculation!

I know ????

[trellheim]

Has anyone an up-to-date copy of R5 - By which I mean up-to-date from at least this year. Pay is set in that document.

[Auldsod]

Assuming this will need a change to R5 or at least wording in it that will directly link pay to the pdf equivalent with whatever adjustments (like the 10% reduction).

Also, I'd appreciate a copy of R5 too if anyone has a copy.

[AC182]

Has anyone an up-to-date copy of R5 - By which I mean up-to-date from at least this year. Pay is set in that document.

There currently us no up to date R5. Only the R5 from pre re-org exists in an effective form. A new R5 is still in the works but has not been publicised and is not relevant until it becomes effective.

[Auldsod]

Forgive my ignorance but is R5 a document that can be amended by the DoD or does it require legislation?

[AC182]

Forgive my ignorance but is R5 a document that can be amended by the DoD or does it require legislation?

R5 is a DFR (open to correction) and while it is open to amendment, it is not a living document thats updated in real time. The fact that it hasnt been updated and published is the biggest problem with the reorg in my opinion.

[DeV]

Has anyone an up-to-date copy of R5 - By which I mean up-to-date from at least this year. Pay is set in that document.

I last checked R5 about a month or 2 ago and there have been no amendments of note in approx 3 years

Assuming this will need a change to R5 or at least wording in it that will directly link pay to the pdf equivalent with whatever adjustments (like the 10% reduction).

Also, I'd appreciate a copy of R5 too if anyone has a copy.

Well here's the thing........ R5 states that refer to DFR S3 for rates of RDF pay rates (which as far as I know haven't been amended to take account of the 10%) and to paraphrase R5 we are supposed to get exactly the same as the PDF (ie no 10% reduction).

There currently us no up to date R5. Only the R5 from pre re-org exists in an effective form. A new R5 is still in the works but has not been publicised and is not relevant until it becomes effective.

Forgive my ignorance but is R5 a document that can be amended by the DoD or does it require legislation?

R5 is a DFR (open to correction) and while it is open to amendment, it is not a living document thats updated in real time. The fact that it hasnt been updated and published is the biggest problem with the reorg in my opinion.

There is always an up to date R5..... it is just a lot of amendments are required (..... and haven't been made)


The watefall of legislation is as follows (ignoring case law etc):

- Bunreacht na hEireann (can only be amended by referendum)

- Defence Acts 1954-2015 (can only be amended by the Oireachtas and must be signed by the President), this is primary legislation

- Defence Force Regulation (can only be amended by the Department of Defence and must be signed by the Minister of Defence), can only be made where the Defence Acts specifically allow the Minister to make Regulations, this is secondary legislation (or a Statutory Instrument)

- Admin/Logs Instructions of DFR - in this case we are talking Admin Instruction R5 (not 100% sure who drafts this but I assume DFHQ as it must be signed by Deputy Chief of Staff (Support) (DCOS (Sp)), can only made where the DFR specifically allows DCOS (Sp) to make regulations

[Auldsod]

Well here's the thing........ R5 states that refer to DFR S3 for rates of RDF pay rates (which as far as I know haven't been amended to take account of the 10%) and to paraphrase R5 we are supposed to get exactly the same as the PDF (ie no 10% reduction).

Is there a contradiction here or is S3 just the DFR which details PDF pay and thus all DF pay? I'm assuming that R5 simply refers to S3 for the DF pay rates?

I would find it strange that the pay rates were cut by 10% without some kind of amendment to DFR (R5 you'd imagine). This looks to me like:

- There was never a difference in pay rates before. RDF just got same pay at first point on scale and no MSA. Simple.
- Pay rates cut by 10% without change to DFR. Implimented by memo, email, God knows?
- The DF has never needed a process to monitor and update a seperate RDF pay scale so guess what it never happened and no thought was given to haddington road agreements etc.
- The common excuse for the difference is that RDFRA was 'outside the room' during discussion on Landsdowne Road, Haddington Road agreements, etc. Should it have have mattered? The RDF is part of the DF. Rates should have been linked to R5 which should have been updated with the 10% reduction.
- This possibly hasn't been looked at before as everyone involved knows its a bit of clustfu*k. Easier to ignore.
- R5 will be updated here fixing the pay issue going forward. The 10% reduction wasn't in there in the first place so fair chance we will see pay parity back to point one on the scale...
- No backpay. Far too messy. There isn't the money or appetite there to resolve.

My two cents...

[DeV]

DFR R5 says we get the same point on the scale as PDF which is in S3. In S3, open to correction, but it supports what R5 says (ie no 10% reduction).

Now the 10% could be in a Finance Act (not sure how the pay things are implemented. somewhere, being primary legislation that would over rule the DFR but that would probably require a legal challenge as it is not where it is supposed to be.

The long and the short of it is that the DFRs are law. No email, letter etc can change the law, and the pay rates are supposed to be set down in law. We know the 10% was implemented and new RDF line pay rates were implemented.

All the DoD have to do is add a sentence to R5 and probably put a new table in S3 and put it in front of the Minister.

R5 is currently not fit for purpose and hasn’t been since 2013. There are multiple references (for example) of things needing to approved by OC Bde RDF. That appointment ceased to exist in 2012. All they have to do is a find and replace and put it in front of the Minister to sign.

Funny how they amended it when necessary for gratuity (I think it was 2 weeks prior to it having to be paid).

[Poiuyt]

Forgive my ignorance but is R5 a document that can be amended by the DoD or does it require legislation?

Generally a DFR must be signed off by the Minister and, therefore, carries legal weight. The accompanying AI (Admin Instruction) lacks the legal force but is supposed to be a lot more fluid, amendable and detailed.

For example, DFR R5 would say the RDF has to be paid according to set down procedures, AI R5 would lay out those procedures. Not paying the RDF would require ministerial approval, changing the procedure of how they are paid would be a DoD decision and relatively easy to change.

[trellheim]

DFRs = Secondary legislation per the 1954 act. They do not need to be published in IRIS or the Oireachtas library save in very restricted circumstances.

DFR R5 sets out the pay applicable to the RDF. It generally pays you with respect to PDF rates which are listed in S3. As far as I can gather neither S3 nor R5 have been updated for the 10% paycut.

A recent ministerial question said this was because of FEMPI/LRA/HRA etc , but , tellingly, RDF are not subject to FEMPI it clearly mentions PDF only .

Further, FEMPI overrode S3 for PDF but not for RDF so its a rats nest right now but I still think there's no regulation for the 10% paycut which would have to be in R5 ( and you can't find the 10% paycut for RDF in FEMPI either, go on, have a look, I dare you lol )

[DeV]

Like the recruitment and promotion embargo across the public service that stated in black and white “Permanent Defence Force” which DoD interpreted as PDF and RDF