Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 19 Oct 1994

Vol. 446 No. 1

Adjournment Debate. - Defence Force Promotions.

Mr. McGrath

Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to raise this matter on the Adjournment. I also thank the Minister, Deputy Andrews, for coming in to respond.

It was recently announced in the Defence Forces that interviews would take place for promotion from the rank of captain to that of commandant. Promotional opportunities were restricted to the 51st cadet group who were commissioned on two separate dates, 1 December 1975 and 4 October 1976. I believe there are 61 officers in that group. The third potential officer class was commissioned on 14 June 1976 and I understand there are eight officers in that class who hold the rank of captain. Those eight men are excluded from participation in the present round of promotional interviews. Are they being excluded simply because they have risen through the ranks to captain level rather than coming through the cadet school? If that is so I wonder who decided they should be excluded.

This exclusion is unjust when one considers the date on which those men were commissioned and the fact that officers junior to them are allowed to participate in the competition for promotion. The decision is also unjust when one considers that many of the officers from the third potential officer class may be compelled to retire shortly if they remain in the rank of captain. This will have serious implications for those men and their families and will seriously affect their pension entitlements. If such treatment were contemplated in the private sector, not alone would it be regarded as unjust but there would be staff unrest and a walk out. The dedication, quality, commitment and experience of those officers is well known at every level of the Defence Forces and their exclusion from at least the possibility of promotion has sent waves of disbelief and disappointment throughout the force. Morale has been seriously affected.

The Gleeson report on the Defence Forces published in July 1990 refers specifically in paragraph 268 to the need to encourage NCOs to strive for promotion to the rank of officer. It states that the commission would favour the introduction of appropriate inducements in relation to remuneration, postings and future promotional prospects aimed at encouraging the widest possible candidature among serving NCOs. The present action goes against the spirit of that recommendation and serves to discourage NCOs from bettering themselves. I also refer the Minister to paragraphs 227 and 229 of the Gleeson report. The men involved meet all the criteria recommended in those paragraphs. This again highlights the injustice being suffered by those officers.

I call on the Minister to intervene in this debacle before it is too late. Knowing his commitment to justice, I am confident he will intervene and ensure that justice prevails on this occasion.

Minister for Defence (Mr. Andrews)

I am glad to be able to tell the Deputy that I have good news for him.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this matter this evening, one in which I have taken a personal interest. I am fully abreast of all developments connected with it.

The thrust of the Gleeson report, published in 1990, in relation to promotions in the Permanent Defence Force was to the effect that there should be a move away from the previous seniority-based system to a meritocracy, a more open merit-based, competitive approach. Given the radical nature of this recommendation, it was felt appropriate to introduce it in a gradual rather than in a sudden fashion into the Permanent Defence Force. In relation to promotions at the level of captain or commandant, an agreement reached with the Representative Association of Commissioned Officers — RACO — provided that captains of the then most senior cadet class, the 50th, together with other captains from earlier classes who had not been promoted with their own class, would be eligible to compete in a competition held in 1993. This arrangement, which became known as preserving class integrity, worked satisfactorily in 1993 and was to be applied to the competition held this year.

The preservation of class integrity in respect of the captain to commandant promotion competition this year became difficult to sustain when it emerged that a group of officers, not from the cadet stream but who had been commissioned from the ranks, had the same length of commissioned service and an equal length of service in the rank of captain as at least half the 51st cadet class. The question of their admission to the competition was raised with the Representative Association of Commissioned Officers and I discussed it with RACO on 9 June this year.

I am convinced that the 3rd potential officers course group has a case, in justice, to be admitted to the 1994 captain to commandant promotion competition being held at present. I am sustained in this view by legal advice I have received from the Attorney General. Accordingly, I concluded some time ago that the 3rd potential officers course group should be allowed to compete for promotion from captain to commandant in the current competition. This has been made known to the representative association.

Discussions are taking place under the auspices of the Defence Forces Conciliation Council with a view to advancing this matter. I established a scheme of conciliation and arbitration for the Defence Forces last year. It is a comprehensive and sophisticated system and is the appropriate forum for dealing with issues such as this.

I am aware of RACO's concern in relation to officers recruited in the large cadet classes of the mid-1970s who, in the nature of things, see their promotion prospects as being somewhat limited. However, it will be possible to arrive at a future system of promotion at this level which will cater for the legitimate aspirations of captains for promotion to commandant while, at the same time, providing the Permanent Defence Force with access to a pool of talented officers of an appropriate age who will be required to fill appointments in higher ranks.