ARMY RETIREMENT PERMANENT FORCES NOT SATISFIED

Greymouth Evening Star, 8 February 1947, Page 3

ARMY RETIREMENT PERMANENT FORCES NOT SATISFIED

EFFECT OF AGE LIMIT (P.A.) DUNEDIN, Feb. 7. Dissatisfaction exists among members of the permanent forces throughout New Zealand with regulations recently gazetted reducing the retiring age of officers and other ranks, which was followed by a Gazette notice announcing the retirement of several members. The Gazette notice states that general officers of the permanent staff should retire on completion of appointment, brigadiers and colonels at the age of 55, lieutenant-colonels at 50, and majors, captains, and subalterns at 47 ? while warrant officers, nori-com-missioned officers, and men shall be discharged on attaining the age of 45.

The dissatisfaction exists principally among other ranks. A man entering the regular forces at the age of 18 could attain only the rank of warrant officer by the time he was 45 on the present scale of salaries, made in 1931, and not yet increased. A warrant officer would be earning about £8 a week, from which would be deducted 5 per cent, for superannuation, as well as income tax. His superannuation on retirement at- 45 would be about £4 a week. Reconsidering Choice.

Discharged at an age when their family responsibilities would be greater than on enlistment and with none other than Army training to fit them for obtaining employment in competition with men with years of experience behind them, other ranks of the permanent staff, with few exceptions, are now seriously reconsidering their choice of the Army as a career. No system of trade training exists for men of the permanent staff in New Zealand, as is the case with regular soldiers in England. The principal hope of finding employment would be through rehabilitation trade training courses, beginning at the age of 45. There is also a “string” to promotion above the rank of major as the new regulations state that “in making selections for promotion above the rank of major, chief considerations will be professional qualifications, efficiency, and character, and only when these are approximately equal will consideration be given to length of service.” That mqy mean that an officer at Army Headquarters will receive quicker promotion than a comparatively unknown man in some distant area post. No. Independent Tribunal. There is no independent tribunal to which an appeal may be made about promotions in the Army, as exists in the Public Service. Appeals could, in theory, be carried as far as the King, as raising of the Army is a prerogative of the Crown; but it is doubtful whether this appeal would have the desired result. From the point of view of the man who intends to adopt the Army as his career, present inducements are such as to turn worthwhile men away to occupations offering greater length of service. From the Army point of view, the new retiring ages will ensure a young, fit permanent staff, but it is likely that they will defeat the object of attracting the right type of men to the. forces, since the jobs are now of limited span.