The true effects of amendments to the discipline system

In her e-mail of 4 June 2008, the Chief Commissioner asked for members’ feed-back on the outline she provided regarding the review of the discipline system.   These are the true effects of the amendments:

The Police Association has not been consulted on this critical issue since 2005, despite requests.   This means that your views have not been considered in these amendments, which dictate the manner in which you will work – and may be dismissed – in the future.

On 4 June 2008, your Association met with officers of the Department of Justice. 15 minutes before that meeting commenced, again without consultation with your Association, the Chief Commissioner’s e-mail was sent.

These are the verbal explanations provided to us by the DoJ:

The proposals will provide power to the Chief Commissioner to summarily dismiss members who have an offence found proven against them at court.   This would include a member who receives a Good Behaviour Bond and removes your current right to a Discipline Hearing, which can be appealable to the Police Appeals Board.

The amendments will also create the authority for the Chief Commissioner to (effectively) suspend any member on long term absence from the Force.   This can include Leave Without Pay, Long Service Leave or any other form of extended leave, including sick leave and Work Cover Leave.

The ‘suspension’ will mean that members in these circumstances will lose the powers of the Office of Constable (those on Leave Without Pay are obviously not paid by the Force) yet they will remain subjected to the discipline provisions of the Act.   

Read the attachment to the Chief Commissioner’s e-mail.   It reveals the revised and “streamlined” process will remove your current entitlement to a binding right of appeal before the Police Appeals Board.   It also advises you that you will be treated like other public servants in relation to performance and misconduct.  

Our colleagues in Western Australia currently suffer from Management Action Plans.   They have told us how unworkable they are; how they rely entirely on the good will of the person controlling them, and how they can and sometimes do result in a dismissal by their Commissioner, with no possibility of reinstatement.

The supposed sweetener was advice that S.123 of the Act will be amended to make the State liable for civil matters rather than individual members.   BUT, the State will be able to ‘join’ you to an action, which will still make you liable.   So, while the means of addressing this issue will change, the practical application may not.

The remaining issue was the part time employment matters negotiated in EB 2006.   We will wait to see the devil in the detail of those arrangements before commenting.

We have requested an urgent meeting with the Minister for Police & Emergency Services and will keep you informed of the facts surrounding these issues, as they emerge.   We will continue to rigorously represent your best interests.

Greg Davies

Discipline/Legal Manager