March 2002 Volume 83 Number 3
"serving the protectors"
| March 2002 Volume 83 Number 3 "serving the protectors" |
|
|
|
|
| By Mark Carroll, PASA Assistant Secretary |
Prosecution
To provide discussion on a raft of concerns held by prosecutors, a Prosecution Services meeting was held at the Police Association in July 2001. These concerns included the current state of prosecution workloads, staffing and the future of SAPOL prosecutions.
The Commissioner of Police attended the meeting. His key points were that:
• SAPOL had conducted a review of Prosecution that clearly indicated it was not viable to place police prosecutions under the auspices of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
• If not enough police officers can be enticed to perform the prosecutor role, SAPOL would have to consider bringing other non-sworn officers into SAPOL.
• It was recognized that there had been additional responsibilities placed upon the prosecutors’ role and disclosure rules were cited as an example.A representative group of prosecutors formed a working party to help identify prosecutors’ industrial concerns. This working party’s first meeting was held on November 9, 2001. The working party members expressed concerns about the working environment that today confronts most prosecutors. Those concerns included:
• Staffing – too few positions in country and metropolitan LSAs – management not accepting numerous reports by OCs relative to increased staffing in units.
• No depth in Prosecution and regulation 29 promotions needed to fill vacancies.
• No members applying for positions at either senior constable or sergeant rank – e.g. Sturt vacancies.
• No role-models or tutors, too few senior, experienced prosecutors from whom to draw experience, and upon whom to rely.
• LSA structure a hindrance to effective functioning of prosecution.
• Prosecutors do unpaid overtime constantly.
• Prosecutors cannot continue to function at this level and are resorting to working after hours at home to keep up.
• Workload impacting on health, welfare and family responsibilities.
• Adjudication function is a burden. Lack of central adjudication for both traffic and criminal prosecutions.
• Operation orders do not take into account the adjudication and subsequent prosecution workload and are not planned for in operations – could see up to an extra 500 files in a month on any specific larger scale operation but no extra prosecutors.
• Decentralization has adversely affected the exchange of staff, the morale/camaraderie and communication of all prosecutors and prosecutorial functions.
• Other extraneous duties such as statistical records maintenance for performance outcome reviews take up large amounts of time.
• Additional clerical support required.The main theme for these concerns is staffing vis-a-vis workload. It is a recurring theme in many workplaces and functions.
SAPOL appears slow to act. As an example, the Focus 21 Review and Re-engineering of Service Delivery by Prosecution Services Division, at recommendations 4 and 5, indicated the need for an extra prosecutor at Far North Division by the creation of a prosecutor at Coober Pedy and a .5 PSMA support position. This recommendation has yet to be actioned.
Prosectors and their health suffer. The function and members of Prosecution deserve better.
Higher-duties payments – did you know?
Since November 1998, when you relieve at a higher (non-officer of police) rank, the total number of days in such relieving capacity will influence the increment you are paid. For example, if you have relieved in a sergeant position since November 1998 for more than a year, you will be paid at increment 2. The relieving period does not have to be continuous. The cumulative number of days is what affects the remuneration.
SAPOL requires members to maintain a personal record of extended duties performed when requesting that an aggregated group of extended duty periods be considered for the higher incremental payment for subsequent periods of extended duty. The record of prior higher duties periods is to be attached to the relevant PD 162 for determination of the appropriate increment level. (Refer to Police Gazette 24.2.99, issue 4 page 38).
Career progression
Last month’s The Industrial Front stirred a response from members who supported the argument to review the current rank structure and remuneration model in an effort to break the nexus between rank and salary, or, alternatively, provide more promotional opportunities within existing structures.
The association is committed to a full-scale review of policing career structures.
|
||||||||||
|
The Police Journal Online is an
official publication of the Police Association of South Australia and is
published monthly. Editors of kindred publications can seek permission from the Editor to re-publish any Police Journal Online article. Copyright 2001 The Police Association of South Australia sustance |