Australian Army Journal

ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE
From Institution to Occupation:
Australian Army Culture in Transition
of feminist advocates, both individuals and groups, parliamentary lobby groups
and the expectations of females in the Army, had successfully combined to bring
about change.
Retention
The introduction of the all-volunteer force demanded other flow-on changes in
military remuneration and various conditions of service. This trend was clearly a
move away from the institutional features of pay and conditions set solely by the
employer, in this case the Commonwealth Government, to the more occupational
model in line with the civilian workforce. This included the abolition of the daily
rate of pay or wage to an annual military base salary and the inclusion of a service
allowance. The introduction of an annual military salary allowed a direct comparison
with that of civilian counterparts, something which had been difficult to achieve
previously. The service allowance, which was to be paid in lieu of other allowances
such as married members’ allowance, upheld the principle of equal pay for equal
work, but it was also paid in lieu of overtime and compensation for ‘exigencies’
of the service. While the pay system was not flexible enough to cater for individual
overtime, the concept was at least acknowledged.
Other civilian-based workplace policies and procedures have also been introduced
into the military’s remuneration process. The crucial matter of determining service
pay and allowances, formerly determined by the Minister for Defence as advised
by the Committee of Reference, as the representative of the employer
(the Commonwealth Government), was replaced in 1985 with the independent
Defence Force Remuneration Tribunal (DFRT). The establishment of the DFRT
allowed the military equal access to the principles by which the wider Australian
community is rewarded for work and is a further step on the occupational scale.
As a consequence we have seen the Chief of the Defence Force testifying
to the DFRT during the ADF wage case in opposition to his employer,
the Commonwealth. This is, indeed, a far cry from the previous institutional
paternalistic approach to remuneration. Today, representatives from the Australia
Defence Association or Defence Force Welfare Association are officially welcomed
as observers at DFRT hearings. 19
It is clear, however, that members of the Army still hold strong institutional values
concerning pay. In 1994, performance-based monetary bonuses for senior military
officers were introduced with the intention of expanding this subsequently to all ranks.
The idea proved unpopular, even among the recipients, as it cut across the ethos of
teamwork and the ‘all of one company’ principle on which the Army prides itself.
Australian Army Journal
Culture edition 2013, Volume X, Number 3 Page 194