Home' Army News : June 9th 2011 Contents Turning 30-something?
Join before 30 June 2011 and save.
If your 30-something partner is not in the permanent ADF and does not have private hospital insurance yet,
then under Federal Government laws, they'll be up for higher premiums for every year they delay taking it out.
But there's no need for the birthday party to be spoiled. Just tell them to call Defence Health now to find out
how to avoid or minimise the higher premiums.
The longer they leave it, the more it will cost.
Call Defence Health on 1800 335 425 or visit www.defencehealth.com.au before 30 June.
Lifetime Health Cover is applicable to the civilian dependants of full-time ADF personnel.
Army June 9, 2011
I WAS speaking to a friend the other day and he told
me disheartening news.
He had heard that the JTF commander in
Afghanistan stated he only wants WO1s on the
Operational Mentor and Liaison Team.
As the Army is a small world and information travels
far and wide on the diggers' net, it may not be correct.
I would like to know if this is correct as I missed
out on a trip with 2RAR due to numbers and, if this had
anything to do with it, I have my back up as it would
have been my first deployment to the Middle East and
I was looking forward to the experience. It would also
have been my last chance with a battalion as I will be
posted at the end of this year.
I don't see how one rank can cover everything and
I have experience with the most recent TTPs and the
eight-man section, not to mention my long list of experi-
ences that comes with my 20 years.
My friend also told me that some didn't pass the
TOETs when tested for deployment. Now I'm not hav-
ing a crack at WO1s, I'm not insubordinate and I do
have friends who are WO1s, but that is a big call and I
think and feel experience not rank should be the big fac-
tor as you want the right people for the job.
Sgt David Joliffe
AT THE risk of sounding like a waster
whinging to the editor, I have noted with
interest the announcement to increase mar-
ried quarter (MQ) and living-in accommoda-
tion (LIA) contributions from May 26.
Although I am grateful Defence subsidises
our MQ contributions, it is a condition of
service that all of us were originally recruited
under that MQ and LIA subsidisation which
was provided for at a generous rate.
This increase comes on the back of other
numerous attacks on our conditions of service
since December 2007.
In my case the increase will amount to an
11.5 per cent immediate rise on what I currently
pay for a MQ, increasing from $370 per fort-
night to $410 according to information I have
received from the pay cell.
This decision has just negated any pay rise
that I have received in the past two years. If I
was to request a 11.5 per cent pay rise effective
a month from the original request, I would be
rightly told to bugger off.
In relation to my fellow soldiers who have
LIA, I fail to see why an increase is required
when they are being housed on base in accom-
modation that Defence already owns which is
not subject to a rental market.
With such decisions coming thick and fast,
it is difficult not to suspect, as many do, that
the $20 billion in savings demanded by the
Strategic Reform Program are in part being
made on the backs of every member of the ARA
by way of the reduction or curtailment of our
conditions of service.
The circumstantial evidence is growing.
LCpl Peter Evans
New contributions unfair
Mentors: Should operational positions be allocated based on rank or the ability and
experience of potential candidates?
Photo by Sgt Mick Davis
DGPERS-A submitted an article to Army for
inclusion in the May 26 edition to mark National
Reconciliation Week's 2011 theme of "Let's talk
It was intended that this article would recognise
the contribution made by the members of the Army
Indigenous Strategy Steering Committee and promote
self-identification on PMKeyS by Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander soldiers.
Unfortunately, Army edited the published article, "A
chance to improve Indigenous records", in a way that
destroyed the integrity of the original article.
In the opening line, many Indigenous soldiers are
ignored by the use of "Aboriginal".
Army generally uses the term Indigenous or ATSI
acronym to describe Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islanders. Changing Indigenous to Aboriginal and then
omitting Torres Strait Islanders in that opening para-
graph was disrespectful.
DGPers-A is committed to the goals of CA's
Directive including raising Indigenous cultural aware-
ness and developing personnel policy to support the
participation and retention of Indigenous soldiers.
Col Brendan Stevens
WorkForce Strategy --Army
Editor's note: Army apologises for the error.
not include all
Links Archive May 26th 2011 June 23rd 2011 Navigation Previous Page Next Page