Review into the treatment of women at the Australian Defence Force ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 10: Minimising Risk, Managing Incidents and Ensuring the Safety of the Workplace – Recommendations 22-31Nevertheless, these checks are only a short term solution that depend on individuals’ skills, and thecontinued smooth functioning of the system. A mandated annual quality assurance mechanism wouldoffer more stability in the longer term.ConclusionThe intent of Recommendation 25 appears to have been met. At the completion of the Audit, ADFA waswaiting for a fact sheet from DSPR around which it could base its strategic organisational response tothe Unacceptable Behaviour survey (conducted in September 2012). DSPR is a small organisation witha large body of work to complete. If it is unable to provide a formal fact sheet in a timely way, ADFAshould draw from the entire report provided to it, and especially the executive summary, in order to givesome feedback to staff and undergraduates, and to develop a response to issues of concern. Regularadministrations of the survey and meaningful follow ups are necessary in order for ADFA to be able tocreate benchmarks, measure progress and ensure effective organisational responses.ADFA and DSPR have developed a series of surveys and research proposals with the aim of collectinga wider range of comparable data across Defence and external to it. They have done this with minimalresources and without the authority to compel outside parties’ involvement. The Audit commends ADFAand DSPR on these efforts.The new complaints and incidents systems viewed by the Audit in early 2013 satisfy the intent ofRecommendation 27. The systems have met the intent of the recommendations as well as possiblewithin privacy constraints. Improvements have been driven by better education, a series of COMDT’sDirectives outlining aspects of the discipline regime, and a reorganisation of ADFA’s resources. Thesechanges have meant that ADFA has had the knowledge and capacity to collect information and organiseits systems in a more transparent and usable way.Better clarity of information and processes to provide reports to the COMDT and other senior staff arepromising developments. These processes were only months old at the completion of the Audit andshould be monitored for effectiveness and any necessary adjustments should be made.The design of the new incidents management systems provides for some level of internal checking, buta formal annual quality assurance mechanism is still required for the longer term integrity of the system.1 DSPR was known as DSPPR until recently. Most reports cited are attributed to DSPPR, but the new name is used in the text.2 Directorate of Strategic People Policy Research, Australian Defence Force Academy 2011 Unacceptable Behaviour Survey,DSPPR Report 5/2011, Department of Defence (2011), p 2.3 Australian Human Rights Commission, Report on the Review into the Treatment of Women at the Australian Defence ForceAcademy, 2011, p 32. At http://www.humanrights.gov.au/defencereview/index.html (viewed 13 February 2013).4 Directorate of Strategic People Policy Research, Australian Defence Force Academy 2012 Unacceptable Behaviour SurveyReport, DSPPR Report 18/2012 Department of Defence (2012), p 122.5 MAJGEN J Rosenfeld, ‘Australian Defence Human Research Ethics Committee (ADHREC) Protocol 675-12 – ADFA 2012Unacceptable Behaviour Survey’, 19 September 2012, provided to the Audit by Dr N Miller 28 September 2012.6 Directorate of Strategic People Policy Research, Australian Defence Force Academy 2012 Unacceptable Behaviour SurveyReport, DSPPR Report 18/2012, Department of Defence.7 Meeting with DSPR, 19 February 2013.8 For example ‘sexual stories or offensive jokes’ shared ‘among friends joking outside of the workplace’ may not be thought ofas unacceptable but may be recorded as such in the 2011 survey. Directorate of Strategic People Policy Research, AustralianDefence Force Academy 2012 Unacceptable Behaviour Survey Report, DSPPR Report 18/2012, Department of Defence (2012),p 121.9 The categories are:• work-related harassment• person-related harassment• physical-related harassment• bullying114
• discrimination• abuse of power• crude behaviour• unwanted sexual attention• sexual coercion• acts of indecency• sexual assault (minor)• sexual assault (major)• other acts/harassment.10 Directorate of Strategic People Policy Research, Australian Defence Force Academy 2012 Unacceptable Behaviour SurveyReport, DSPPR Report 18/2012, Department of Defence (2012), p 122.11 The sexual harassment total was obtained by grouping:• crude behaviour (sexually suggestive comments, gestures or jokes that made you feel offended; sexually explicit pictures,posters or gifts that made you feel offended; sexually explicit emails, social media messages, or SMS/MMS that made youfeel offended)• unwanted sexual attention (inappropriate staring or leering that made you feel intimidated; intrusive questions aboutyour private life or physical appearance that made you feel offended; repeated or inappropriate advances on email, socialnetworking websites or internet chat rooms; repeated or inappropriate invitations to go out on dates; unwelcome touching,hugging, cornering or kissing)• sexual coercion (requests or pressure for sex or other sexual acts).See Directorate of Strategic People Policy Research, Australian Defence Force Academy 2012 Unacceptable Behaviour SurveyReport, DSPPR Report 18/2012, Department of Defence (2012), pp 103-4.12 The sexual offence total was obtained by grouping:• acts of indecency (exposed themselves in a way that made you feel offended; watched or recorded you without yourconsent while you were in private, which made you feel offended; any other unwanted sexual behaviour or touching withoutyour consent)• sexual assault (minor) (inappropriate physical contact) and• sexual assault (major) (actual or attempted rape or sexual assault).See Directorate of Strategic People Policy Research, Australian Defence Force Academy 2012 Unacceptable Behaviour SurveyReport, DSPPR Report 18/2012, Department of Defence (2012), p 105.13 RIT, ‘Broderick Audit Summary Final 280912’, provided to the Audit by Dr N Miller, 28 September 2012.14 MAJGEN J Rosenfeld, ‘Australian Defence Human Research Ethics Committee (ADHREC) Protocol 675-12 – Australian DefenceForce Training Establishments 2012 Unacceptable Behaviour Survey’, 19 September 2012, provided to the Audit by Dr N Miller,28 September 2012.15 For example, ADFA is larger, more diverse (in terms of Service and gender) and undergraduates are there for longer incomparison to RMC. This is reflected in the respondents demographics from the respective surveys:ADFARMCRespondents (% of total site population) 627 (72.5%) 295 (69.6%)Female respondents (% of respondents) 128 (20.4%) 28 (9.5%)Army respondents (% of respondents) 295 (47.4%) 269 (91.2%)In addition, ADFA respondents were split relatively evenly among first (37.7%), second (35.2%) and third year (27.1%)undergraduates, while respondents at RMC were most likely to have been at the college for less than one year. DSPR notethat this affects comparability, as the unacceptable behaviour surveys ask about the previous 12 month period. Most ADFArespondents would be able to refer to an entire 12 month period while most RMC respondents would not.16 Directorate of Strategic People Research, Royal Military College Duntroon 2012 Unacceptable Behaviour Survey Report, DSPRReport 1/2013, Department of Defence.17 J Vaile, email to the Audit, 16 January 2013.18 J Vaile, email to the Audit, 7 February 2013.19 DSPR, ‘Proposed option for Unacceptable Behaviour data collection in Defence’, provided to the Audit by J Vaile, 16 January2013.20 The scope of a QA is outlined in Department of Defence, Defence Instructions (General) ADMIN 67-2, Quick Assessment,7 August 2007.21 Interview 50, senior ADFA staff, 19 February 2013; CDRE BJ Kafer, ‘Commandant’s Directive 14/12 – ‘Quick assessments and“serious or complex incidents’’, 24 September 2012, provided to the Audit by Dr N Miller, 21 November 2012.22 QA Report Template in CDRE BJ Kafer, ‘Commandant’s Directive 14/12 – ‘Quick assessments and “serious or complexincidents”, 24 September 2012, provided to the Audit by Dr N Miller, 21 November 2012.23 Interview 50, senior ADFA staff, 19 February 2013.24 The QA resister captures QA number, subject, description of incident, start date, finish date, assessor’s details, recommendedaction, decision, file, security classification, record of implementation.25 Interview 50, senior ADFA staff, 19 February 201326 Interview 51, SQNLDR A Fullick, 19 February 2013.Audit Report: Review into the Treatment of Women at the Australian Defence Force Academy • 2013 • 115
Page 1 and 2:
Review into the Treatmentof Women a
Page 3:
Audit Report:Review into the Treatm
Page 6 and 7:
ContentsA Message from the Commissi
Page 8 and 9:
A Message from the CommissionerADFA
Page 10 and 11:
Chapter 1:Audit ApproachThe Report
Page 12 and 13:
Chapter 1: Audit ApproachThe Audit
Page 14 and 15:
Chapter 2: Summary of Audit Finding
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Chapter 3: MethodologyQuantitative
Page 22 and 23:
Chapter 4:Implementationof ReviewRe
Page 25 and 26:
Organisational PressuresDefence is
Page 27 and 28:
[My awareness is] pretty limited I
Page 30 and 31:
Chapter 5:ADFA’s Role andPurposeR
Page 32 and 33:
Chapter 5: ADFA’s Role and Purpos
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36:
Page 40 and 41:
Chapter 6:Equity and DiversityRecom
Page 42 and 43:
Chapter 6: Equity and Diversity - R
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Chapter 7:ADFA’s Structure andSta
Page 54 and 55:
Chapter 7: ADFA’s Structure and S
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71: Chapter 7: ADFA’s Structure and S
Page 72 and 73: Chapter 8:Midshipmen and Cadetsare
Page 74 and 75: Chapter 8: Midshipmen and Cadets ar
Page 86 and 87: Chapter 9:Accommodation andSupervis
Page 88 and 89: Chapter 9: Accommodation and Superv
Page 98 and 99: Chapter 10: Minimising Risk, Managi
Page 135 and 136: Further InformationAustralian Human
show all

Review into the treatment of women at the Australian Defence Force ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?