February 1999 Volume 80 Number 2 "serving the protectors"
Readout

Shared Concerns Over Delays

Dear Sir

I respond to the letter in The Readout from Barbara Parfitt titled “Rumour Abounds”.

Ms Parfitt’s concerns regarding the delays in some of the selection procedures are real and are shared by HRM Branch and members generally. In some current selection processes, including the one to which she refers, there has been delay and subsequent review as we work towards improving procedures.

Clearly there is a need for a more timely process. Personnel Section is in the process of redesigning the total selection procedures, including reviewing PID’s format to include key selection criteria, avoid duplication and make it easier for applicants and selection advisory committees to use, together with the redesign of application forms. Secondly, the training of selection advisory committees and development of related transfers and tenure policies which will align with the new Police Act.

This work, along with new and timely grievance and appeals procedures, should produce a much improved process. It is expected that we will be able to publish the new procedures in the near future as they are rapidly approaching second draft stage and ready for further consultation. It is planned to introduce them as a package, probably in line with the proclamation of the act.

Yours sincerely
Ferdi Pit
Acting Officer-in-Charge
Personnel Section, HRMB

Officers Offended

Dear Sir

I read with disgust the article in the December issue of the Police Journal, So You Think It Can’t Happen To You.

If this story is factual then it places every police officer in jeopardy. I have discussed this issue with other officers at Kadina who are equally offended by the way in which our own department and the Government have responded.

We all agree that this issue should now be given first priority in the industrial field and URGENT action to the utmost degree should be taken.

PT Downes
SC1G 2267/9
Kadina
Battle Fought

Battle Fought

The Editor

A big thank you for Andy Dunn, Mark Carroll and Andrew Murray (and the rest of the Association staff) for their help recently in supporting me in a pay claim against SAPOL. A successful outcome was achieved through much hard work done by the Association. I was lucky enough to enlist its assistance, then take a back seat while it fought my “battle” for me. Again, thank you for your support.

Mick Pedler
Constable 916/0
Adelaide Bicycle Patrols
Better Insight from Tragedy

Better Insight from Tregedy

The Editor

After the recent death of my brother, Kym, an officer in the South Australia Police, I would like to offer my most sincere thanks for the support, sympathy and compassion provided to my family during this difficult period by members of the South Australia Police.

To the senior staff, welfare officers and officers who attended at my parents house and at the funeral, thank you. To the senior officer in communications who attended my call on the Monday, I offer my personal thanks for your assistance. To Trevor and Patrice at the Police Club, for your patience and understanding, thank you.

The events of the past weeks have highlighted the very human side of the police force and certainly provided me with a better insight into the difficulties many of our officers face on a day-to-day basis. I count myself as fortunate to know many of them and the strength provided by them over this difficult period has been much appreciated by myself and my family.

To all who have sent condolences, too numerous to count, please accept our thanks.

Glenn Potter
Sheidow Park

Willing Contributors

Dear Peter

As you are aware, Kym Schulz, a Transit Division member, passed away in August, 1998. On behalf of Melinda Schulz and the children, I would like to publicly thank, through the medium of the Police Journal, the following companies and individuals who provided goods and sponsored a number of working activities around the Schulz household.

Bunnings Aust large pergola kit, lattice and shade cloth.
Clipsal surge protector, smoke alarms and infra scans.
Statewide Security & Onkaparinga Council 100 litres of paint.
Truscott Electricalclothes dryer and assorted gifts for the children.
Target Australia $200 worth of gift vouchers.
Myer Marion Nintendo 64 machine.
Games R Us Marion two Nintendo games.
Constable Mark Walker one Nintendo game.
Harris Scarfe one Nintendo game.
GEC Electrical bathroom heat-light exhaust fan.
Adelaide Crows footballs, t-shirts and other promotional gear.
Police Club five cartons of beer for the working bees.
TransAdelaide bobcat to cut driveway, railway sleepers, mulch, RSJs.
Barry’s Hardware Plus water timer and sprinkler.
Laserlite Australia one roof spinaway.
Tanya Mitchell and Anne-Louise Monck one basketball.
Police Credit Union $100.
Foodtown Fairview Park sausages.
Shell Fairview Park soft drinks.

As a result of five hard work activities conducted at the residence by members of the Transit Division and Schulz family friends, the following was completed:

• Exterior of dwelling received two coats of paint.
• Retaining walls and stairs built at the front and rear of the premises.
• Drainage system installed.
• Approximately 150 metres of paving laid.
• Pergola built.

It is heartening to know that at times of personal crisis and need that companies and individuals step forward and support police members.

Again, many thanks to all who assisted.

Oleh Cybulka
Transit Division

Police Response Polite, Sympathetic

Dear Sir

I made a telephone call to the St Agnes Police Department on Saturday 19 December 1998 re very noisy neighbours involving screaming children day and night in a swimming pool next door.

The operator was very sympathetic and asked me to ring 11 444, which after discussion with my husband, I did. Obviously, we did not want to upset anyone but the noise level was intruding on our home so much we could not sit outside or even leave our back door open.

I rang 11 444 and another very polite, sympathetic operator answered and suggested if I required police attendance she could arrange this.

Approximately half an hour later a motor bike police officer did attend next door and minutes later the noise had ceased.

My husband and I wanted to pass on our appreciation and thanks. The operator at St Agnes was wonderful, the operator at the police for attendance was wonderful and the officer who attended next door, who may have come from Bridge Road, was very prompt and certainly did his job.

Our nerves were becoming very frayed and we thank you very much for such an efficient job and know help is at hand when we need it.

Yours faithfully
D Miller

Monitoring Numbers:
“A Legitimate Measuring Tool”

The Editor

You may recall I wrote to the Journal earlier this year expressing my concern about unfair and subjective criticism of “management” and in particular to a misleading and grossly incorrect article about enterprise bargaining. After considerable discussion with Police Association representatives, I acceded to their obvious desire not to publish my letter.

However, here I am again “going to press” after reading your response to a letter written by an Assistant Commissioner concerning work performance. (It is interesting that the editor often chooses to respond to letters which disagree with the Association’s position).

I have read the Assistant Commissioner’s letter carefully and can not find in any way that “he confirms the very practice about which I (the Editor) expressed concern in my October editorial - quotas.” The word “quota” means a prescribed number required, and as you would well know there are no such numbers or requirements in SAPOL.

You then go on to criticise the practice of monitoring members’ outputs by virtue of numbers. Depending on the nature of work being performed this is, and always has been, a legitimate measuring tool and no doubt is used in appropriate circumstances by the Association. Management is not saying this is the all inclusive measurement, and it is but one of a number of methods used in assessing performance. Also, I am confident that most supervisors and managers know that there are numerous factors which influence a member’s output of any particular function that might be part of his or her overall job.

However, if issuing infringement notices is part of someone’s job, then monitoring that output is a legitimate practice of supervisors and managers, and whilst low numbers do not necessarily mean poor performance, they may indicate a need for enquiry as to the causes.

The question of members’ leaking information or making statements to the media is a complex one, which has been previously debated at length and I am aware of the Association’s position on this issue. I do wonder however what the Association’s position would be if one of its employees leaked information or made statements to the media in which he or she criticised the Association Committee or any of its office holders. No doubt you would support this as the employee’s democratic right to express opinions...or would you?

The purpose of this letter is not to support Executive or Senior Management - as you would be aware we all have our “problems” in that forum. But rather it is to express my disappointment at what I consider to be a biased and incorrect response to the Assistant Commissioner’s letter.

As I said in my previous letter, articles by paid officials of the Association have every right to express criticism of the Department. However, due to the potential to significantly influence members’ views, those comments and articles should be accurate and fair. In this case I don’t believe you have done that, and you seem to have made many assumptions about what the Assistant Commissioner has said, which are not supported by the contents of his letter.

John Dicker
HR Command

Response:

I commend John Dicker on his careful reading of Assistant Commissioner Graham Brown’s letter to The Readout. Regretfully, he seems not to have been so diligent in his reading of my response: he misquoted me in his third paragraph.

I wrote: “...he confirms that supports the very practice...” I did not write: “...he confirms the very practice...”

But irrespective of misquotes, SAPOL management seems unwilling to measure members’ work output by the quantity - and quality - of service provided; service which goes beyond the issuing of infringement notices.

But while both John Dicker and Graham Brown complain about leaks to the media, they have failed to address the very reason why members turn to reporters instead of managers.

Regardless of how many times I pose the question, there has been no response. Could it be that in these cases members perceive managers as unapproachable and either unwilling or unable to afford them proper hearings? After all there is nothing to hide - is there?

Andy Dunn
Editor

December Editorial

Dear Sir

I am writing to you in your capacity of Editor, Police Journal, and refer you to your December 1998 editorial.

Having read the full article in the Eastern Courier Messenger to which you referred, I am astounded by your lack of objectivity and completeness in compiling the editorial. In fact, you have hidden the facts from members.

As reported in the Messenger article, I said that only three per cent of 1500 complaints against police each year lead to disciplinary charges. This means that, of the 1500 complaints made against officers, the thorough investigation process clears 95% of police officers of any wrong doing. In that context I said that “while some investigations took too long, police officers should have confidence that the investigation of complaints is a thorough process which should not be regarded with suspicion.”

A far different picture than that painted by your distorted editorial.

You referred in that editorial to three complaints (out of about 4500) as some sort of general indication of representative outcomes.

In presenting your cryptic version of events you did not afford me the opportunity of presenting my version of events and further, you did not even contact me. These are the very shortcomings that your Association has so passionately campaigned against in previous Journal articles. Your double standards are glaringly obvious.

I have raised this matter with the Police Association separately in an effort to gain a reasonable response and provide a balanced view.

Yours sincerely
NJ McKenzie
Deputy Commissioner of Police

Response:

I appreciate the letter from the Deputy Commissioner, but, naturally, I repudiate all of his claims of distortion and hidden facts. I could not have hidden anything contained in the Messenger article.

And my December editorial did not in any way question the Deputy’s figure of “three per cent” of complaints leading to disciplinary charges. But despite that, what degree of stress did the exonerated officers suffer in the quest to clear their names? That is the point - and it’s a point upon which SAPOL senior management needs to comment. One complaint of the type I wrote about is too many.

I agree that police officers should have confidence in the complaints system - but can they? By virtue of its failure to provide a fair go, the current system has shown itself to be one in which no one can be confident. And the Police Association can provide more examples of maligned, officers than the three to which I referred.

As for not inviting Mr McKenzie to comment, I remind readers that I wrote an editorial - a statement of opinion. Had the nature of the column been news or analysis I would naturally have invited him to comment.

Nonetheless, it’s certainly gratifying to see The Readout serving its purpose of providing an amicable forum for informed, topical debate.

Andy Dunn
Editor