Dignity in retirement
Three superannuation schemes exist for police – the
Police Pension Scheme, the Police Lump Sum Scheme and the Triple S Scheme.
Police officers employed before May 4, 1994, are members of either the Police
Pension or Lump Sum Scheme, while police employed after that date are members
of the Triple S Scheme, established under the Southern State Superannuation Act
1994.
The SA Government had closed the Police Pension and Lump Sum
schemes to new entrants by 1994. The government’s actions were – in
April 1994 – based on the South Australian Commission of Audit
recommendations that, 1) all existing defined benefit schemes within government
should be closed to new members and, 2) new entrants to the government sector
should be provided with membership of the existing superannuation guarantee
accumulation schemes, under which the minimum benefits – required under
Commonwealth law – are provided.
At the time, the Police Association argued that, to justify
the schemes’ closure, the government had made two assumptions. First, was
that they represented an unfunded State liability that would continue to grow
and, second, that superannuation above the community minimum should not be
provided from the State budget.
The association illustrated that the notional cost of
employer-provided retirement benefits (clearly documented in the Audit
Commission’s notional costings) showed the Police Lump Sum Scheme was 12
per cent, compared to the cost of the Judges Pensions Scheme at 40 per cent,
and the Parliamentary Superannuation Scheme at 35 per cent.
The association believed the changes were unwarranted, and
would result in:
- The inability of police to retire with dignity.
- Inadequate protection in the event of death or
disability.
- Police superannuation of a standard lower than exists
interstate.
The association recently lobbied the state government to
illustrate the complete inappropriateness of police super coverage over three
different schemes. Always of particular concern to the association has been
members in the Triple S Scheme, in which the level of benefits is not
guaranteed, and police officers cannot be assured of the benefit they will
actually receive when they retire.
The government should appropriately reward police upon their
retirement, especially after the highly demanding and stressful work they
perform over 30-plus-year careers. The recent volatility of the return in the
Triple S scheme highlights the problems facing police officers, who cannot be
assured of having the security of a defined benefit.
The scheme does not address the systemic workplace stresses
and specific psychosocial challenges inherent in policing, in which
less-than-optimal pension benefits have significant negative effects on police
officers and their families.
Country police housing has emerged as a contentious issue for
some officers in recent times.
Despite the recent upgrading of several properties, there
remains a number that fail to meet standards which, not only police, but also
the general public would expect.
With little or no improvement to the standard of some
government housing over the years, grievances have escalated accordingly.
Clearly, the most pertinent issues are those of size, outdated
fixtures and where – within townships – properties are located.
Recent issues of concern to officers have included:
- The allocation of houses not appropriate for their needs,
and lengthy, stressful negotiations to obtain housing which is
appropriate.
- The case of an officer who declined a promotion associated
with a two-person station because the depot house failed to meet his
family’s needs. (The house was way too small and the issue could not be
resolved.)
- The case of a two-person station officer who resides in a
house too small for a family and was told no alternative accommodation would be
provided. (This officer now wishes to reside in private accommodation made
available by the employer of the officer’s partner. For this, however,
permission has been refused.)
- The recent case of an officer selected for a position at a
two-person station, at which the depot house was too small, outdated and unable
to meet the officer’s requirements. (Just 400 metres from this house, the
officer owns a property of his own. Permission for him to reside in it has been
refused.)
Had the issues of these government houses’ size and
standards been addressed through a policy of continuing improvement,
renovations, extensions and replacement, officers’ concerns would never
have emerged.
Real Estate Management has identified that about 11 per cent
of the government housing stock does not meet its own standards.
An extensive strategic asset management plan was completed in
February 2002. The report quotes recent tenant surveys which indicate increased
community expectation, and that government employees in country areas are
unwilling to accept available accommodation. Space (external building area) is,
for tenants, the key issue.
Australian Bureau of Statistics figures on building approvals
for new homes in SA, reveals that the difference in size between government
housing, and those newly constructed homes, is unmistakably vast.
The report identified that only 49 per cent of government
housing stock achieves, and 11 per cent is below, departmental standards.
The remaining 40 per cent might fall below departmental
requirements, and require further investigation.
A total of $9.76 million was required to upgrade and repair
all housing asset items state-wide in 2002-03.
The report further outlined that up to $8 million per year is,
for the next four years, required to bring each property up to an acceptable
government standard.
The government has not provided the required funding
identified in the Real Estate Management Housing Asset Management Plan 2001-02.
As long as country officers have issues with the size and
standard of accommodation, so, too, will the communities they serve. The
housing issue comes with a direct impact on staffing country locations and the
health and welfare of officers who serve in them.
The Police Association committee of management is looking at
these issues and plans to formulate strategies with which to improve the
housing stocks for its members.
