Department of Justice

Tasmanian Industrial Commission

www.tas.gov.au
Contact  |  Accessibility  |  Disclaimer

T117 and T118

 

IN THE TASMANIAN INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION

Industrial Relations Act 1984

 

T117 and T118 of 1985 IN THE MATTER OF applications by the Commissioner of Police to vary the Police Award regarding restructuring of ranks of First Class Constable and Sergeant
   
PRESIDENT 24 July, 1985
   
   

REASONS FOR DECISION

   
APPEARANCES:  
   
For the Commissioner of Police - Mr A B Swinton
  with Mr B Duniam
   
For the Police Association of Tasmania - Mr G R McDermott
   
DATES AND PLACES OF HEARING: 
   
8 May 1985 Hobart  
4 June 1985 Hobart  
   
   

These applications by the Commissioner of Police seek to alter the present classification structure in respect of the ranks of First Class Constable and Sergeant.

FIRST CLASS CONSTABLE

The changes requested to the current classification of First Class Constable First Grade and First Class Constable Second Grade are largely cosmetic. The intention is to facilitate a better public understanding of that class of officer. This is the first promotion rank above Constable.

A further reason is to obviate the somewhat understandable concern of members who feel that the suffixes "First Grade" and "Second Grade" tend to convey unnecessary discrimination or ranking within the one promotion level.

In reality a First Class Constable First Grade is a police officer who has obtained that rank because he has successfully completed the Senior Constable promotion examination.

A First Class Constable Second Grade obtains this rank after 12 years satisfactory service as a Constable. A First Class Second Grade is unable to progress further until he passes the requisite promotion examination.

At present the public would be aware that a First Class Constable First Grade displays one chevron and a star on his uniform sleeve. A First Class Constable Second Grade wears one chevron only.

It is proposed that the insignia for all First Class Constables will in future be one chevron with no star.

No cost whatever is involved in this proposal.

The Police Association indicated its agreement with this part of the application and understands that, if approved of by the Commission, in future the only difference between the two grades of First Class Constable will be discernible internally. That is to say the First Class Constable who obtains that rank following completion of the Senior Constable promotion examination will thereafter be regarded internally as a "First Class Constable qualified for promotion".

On the other hand the Constable who either does not attempt the examination at all or fails to pass will, as is the case at present, become a First Class Constable after 12 years satisfactory service. However he will be regarded internally as a "First Class Constable not qualified for promotion".

In my opinion the applicant seeks only to regularise what in truth has been the case all along. The suggested alteration will unquestionably be less confusing to the public and a good deal more acceptable to the members concerned.

The application is therefore granted.

SERGEANT

The Commissioner has requested that this most senior group of sub-officers be rationalised by deleting from the award the second promotion level of Second Grade Sergeant.

For some 15 years the award has provided for three grades of Sergeant, but has neither defined their duties nor the difference between them. There are differences of course - not the least of which being that the present First Grade Sergeant is the most senior and experienced of all sub-officers.

Having been associated with this award for some 12 years, I have on occasions found it necessary to draw attention to the apparent enigma of the rank of Second Grade Sergeant. This application seeks to redress that situation.

Promotion from Senior Constable to Third Grade Sergeant is conditional upon the member first passing the Sergeant's promotion examination and being nominated for a vacant Third Grade position.

Almost without exception promotion above First Class Constable through all ranks involves the member physically moving to a new location.

There are probably a number of reasons for this; significant among them being the Commissioner's policy of nominating suitably qualified persons to vacant classified positions caused by promotions, resignations, retirements, reclassification of station, deaths etc.

And of course vacant promotion positions invariably occur in areas other than those in which successful applicants or nominees are located. This means that the Department has to meet the cost of relocation and housing expenses. These amount to significant sums of money over a 12 month period.

It is nevertheless understood that if promotion is to be sought the individual probably has little choice but to move with his family to the new location. Invariably this involves wives giving up jobs and children changing schools. It also means that on many occasions by moving into less populated or remote areas no work is available for wives or other members of an officer's family. Often the person concerned finishes up financially worse off despite promotion.

One problem that has bedevilled the Department and members of the Association has been classifying Second Grade Sergeant positions at various locations. It has never been in real issue that the work of Third and Second Grade Sergeants is more or less the same. Indeed, promotion to the Second Grade position is not by examination but by nomination.

Another and more worrying aspect of the present promotion system is the dearth of qualified Second Grade Sergeants from whom to nominate candidates for promotion to First Grade Sergeant. Very few Second Grade Sergeants it seems attempt the required promotion examination. And as the regulations allow only qualified Second Grade personnel to be appointed to the First Grade rank, the Department experiences great difficulty in selecting suitable persons to fill vacancies occurring from time to time.

The Commissioner has therefore proposed that the rank of Second Grade Sergeant be abolished.

In lieu of the existing arrangement, the Commissioner intends that there now be only two levels of Sergeant. They will be "Sergeant" and "Senior Sergeant". The position of Sergeant will be filled in the same way as at present. The salary will be the same as that currently applicable to Third Grade Sergeant.

This has been agreed to by the Association.

After two years in the position of Sergeant, the incumbent will be eligible to sit the prescribed promotion examination rendering the successful member eligible for appointment to the position of Senior Sergeant. If he passes he will advance to a special increment, the amount of which will equate with the present Second Grade Sergeant salary.

The parties believe that in this way more "qualified for promotion" Sergeants will be available for elevation to vacant Senior Sergeant positions.

In short it means that by abolishing the rank of Second Grade Sergeant, all Sergeants with two or more years of experience as such will be entitled to sit the Senior Sergeant promotion examination, thereby creating a larger pool from which to select more suitable nominees for those positions.

The Commissioner has also proposed that a Sergeant who fails the promotion examination or does not attempt promotion immediately, or at all, will none the less be entitled to progress to the second increment (equal to the present Second Grade Sergeant level) after seven years satisfactory service.

Mr McDermott agreed in principle with this proposal but argued that advancement to the second increment should occur after six years.

In giving reasons why the qualifying period should be six years and not seven, Mr McDermott pointed out that statistics available to him indicated that on average it took approximately six years for a Third Grade Sergeant to progress to the rank of Second Grade under the present system.

Assistant Commissioner Swinton did not dispute this. Moreover he advanced no compelling reasons why the period should be seven years and not six. I therefore propose to allow the Commissioner's application for change in structure, but will determine that an unqualified Sergeant shall advance to the second increment after six years satisfactory service.

QUALIFICATION ALLOWANCES

Other consequential alterations sought by the Commissioner were related to existing qualification allowances.

At present a Second Grade Sergeant who has qualified for promotion to First Grade, but is awaiting nomination to that level, attracts a qualification allowance of $573 per annum.

It will be necessary therefore to protect the position of those members who, although losing their identity as Second Grade Sergeants, are none the less entitled to retain any qualification allowance presently being paid. This can be achieved by authorising salary maintenance insofar as continuation of the qualification allowance is concerned. The position might be demonstrated thus:

SERGEANTS ENTITLED TO RETAIN QUALIFICATION ALLOWANCES

Present
Rank
Present
Salary
Qualification
Allowance
Proposed
Salary
Qualification
Allowance

(Salary Maintenance)
Third Grade Sergeant

$24126

Nil

$24126
As Sergeant

Nil

Second Grade Sergeant

$25447

$573

$25447
Sergeant

(second increment)

$573

First Grade Sergeant

$27043

$5731

$27616
Senior Sergeant

Nil

It will be seen from the foregoing table that Second Grade Sergeants who have already qualified for promotion to higher ranks will be able to retain their qualification allowances until further order of the Commission.

Mr McDermott argued that any Sergeant who qualifies for promotion to Senior Sergeant should be eligible for payment of the present allowances now to be retained for those already qualified.

Assistant Commissioner Swinton disagreed. He argued that under the new arrangement a Sergeant with two years experience would be eligible to sit the promotion examination leading to nomination/appointment to the position of Senior Sergeant. In doing so he would immediately and automatically attract a further increment being the equivalent of the present Second Grade Sergeant rate in recognition of this achievement. To award him a qualification allowance in addition would, he said, be double counting.

Mr McDermott pursued the point by stressing that members recently promoted to Second Grade Sergeant who will now transfer to Sergeant (second increment) and who qualify in future for promotion to Senior Sergeant would gain no recognition for their achievements.

I cannot accept this argument as valid at this stage. While I can understand Mr McDermott's point, it seems to me that eventual promotion to Senior Sergeant is almost inevitable for qualified personnel whose performance is otherwise satisfactory. More importantly, if payment for examinations passed is to be the only motivating factor for members undertaking available courses of study, it is doubtful if the person concerned would be considered to be the right member for nomination to Senior Sergeant in any case. Put another way, if a sub-officer will not in future undertake study without the promise of monetary reward for examinations passed, it might be argued that the motivating force in sitting for examinations was more in the nature of a desire for money than from a genuine aspiration to obtain career fulfilment.

By way of analogy it might be said that if every public service clerk demanded payment for each examination passed while preparing himself for future promotion to an administrative position in a career service, the Public Service payroll would increase significantly.

There are many graduates prepared to work in classified positions carrying no monetary recognition for formalised qualifications.

In this case what is done is done and cannot be altered in retrospect. But in modern society attainment of formalised qualifications is regarded as essential for promotion to higher positions. Rewards come with actual promotion, not beforehand.

I decline to accede to Mr McDermott's request for these reasons. However, in view of the fact the proposed revision of the Sergeant's rank structure is new and untried in this State - although well tested in most if not all other States - I will give leave reserved to the parties to further apply should it become clear that the decision I have now taken is impeding Sergeants obtaining the Senior Sergeant promotion qualification.

Clearly this cannot be shown now as I have authorised salary maintenance for those awaiting promotion. But the acid test will be how long it takes for a recently elevated Second Grade Sergeant who subsequently acquires the prerequisite promotion qualification to ultimately attain nomination to the rank of Senior Sergeant.

I am therefore prepared to review this decision in twelve months time but not before.

Assistant Commissioner Swinton also sought inclusion into the award rate for Senior Sergeant the same qualification allowance payable to all First Grade Sergeants.

The present allowance is attracted in the same way Second Grade Sergeants qualify for their allowance.

As fewer promotion positions are available above the rank of Senior Sergeant, a member holding that rank and qualified for promotion to Inspector may well have to, as it were "mark time" until promotion occurs.

It was the view of the Commissioner, and supported by the Association, that as all First Grade Sergeants enjoy this allowance the amount could be conveniently included in the Senior Sergeant base salary.

On eventual promotion to the rank of Inspector a Senior Sergeant in receipt of qualification allowance would be entitled to a substantial salary increase above and beyond that being paid by way of prescribed salary and qualification allowance.

I was also informed recipients of present allowances of this kind are required to make Retirement Benefit Fund contributions on the aggregate of their substantive salary and the allowance received.

Therefore, inclusion in the Senior Sergeant's base salary of a qualification allowance would not involve that person in any additional RBF liability.

With hindsight it is difficult to reconcile the logic of maintaining this allowance as an identifiable secondary component of the senior Sergeant's salary.

I am therefore prepared to accede to the Commissioner's request. The Senior Sergeant's salary will now be increased by $573 to $27616 but entitlement to a qualification allowance will be deleted.

This brings me to a consideration of the wage fixing principles against which all matters falling for determination by the Commission must be tested.

The appropriate Principle in this case is, I believe, Principle 4 - Work Value. What has been put to the Commission and now ruled upon unquestionably addresses the matter of the value of the work of Sergeants. In the result no money changes have been made, as the bottom and top of the Sergeant salary levels remain the same (after allowing for the automatic payment of a $573 qualification allowance to all First Grade or Senior Sergeants). However the Second Grade promotion level has fallen by the wayside and will be deleted from the award.

I believe the only cost involved will be that which is necessary to lift consequentially a small number of Third Grade Sergeants with six or more years satisfactory service from $24126 per annum to the second increment of $25447 per annum.

However, to be offset against that cost must be the significant future savings relating to transportation and removal expenses. Clearly there can be no flow on to any other rank in this award or to any other award of the Commission.

In conclusion I would observe that despite what was put in support of the foregoing rationalisation, it is difficult to discover much overall advantage to the membership and their families.

If I have understood the position correctly, the fact that there is now seen to be little if any difference between the work of Third Grade Sergeant and Second Grade Sergeant, a Senior Constable on promotion to Sergeant may find himself marooned at the location to which he moves. This will then become his base until he is eligible for and promoted to the rank of Senior Sergeant. Such a situation might be contemplated with delight by some and dismay by others. Individual reaction will depend upon whether a particular member enjoys or dislikes the location to which he is now or in the future assigned.

Moreover, fewer promotion positions inevitably results in more competition for those that do become available. In the past some police officers have been promoted to certain ranks, more for reasons of default because no-one else has applied for the job knowing that to win promotion would necessitate a move to an unpopular location. In future competition may become a little more keen, even for less attractive locations.

It is assumed the Association is aware of the risks associated with exercises of this kind.

The alterations proposed, together with such other consequential changes discussed during the hearing, shall take effect from the first pay period commencing on or after 1 July 1985.

 

L A Koebin
PRESIDENT

24 July 1985

1 All First Grade Sergeants attract this allowance