Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

45. To ask the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence his views on criticism of the efforts to reorganise the Army, which in view of unprecedented retirements and resignations have left a significant skills deficit; and his further views on whether low pay, poor morale and isolation from family and home are primary drivers that have resulted in an exodus of personnel. [15275/17]

Paul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As part of a major re-organisation of the Defence Forces in 2012, a decision was taken to consolidate what were then three under-strength Army brigades into two full strength brigades. The decision was taken because it was clear that the three brigade structure was no longer viable, particularly when compared to international norms.

Key aspects of the re-organisation included the consolidation of under-strength units into a smaller number of full strength units, a reduction in the number of headquarters and the associated re-deployment of personnel from administrative and support functions to operational units.

The White Paper on Defence, which was published in 2015, resulted from a comprehensive examination of Defence requirements over a ten year planning horizon and it specifically provides for the retention of the Army’s two Brigade structure.

The re-organisation has maintained the operational capacity of the Defence Forces to the greatest extent possible within the available resource envelope and has improved the deployability and sustainability of the Defence Forces, both at home and overseas. There are no plans to return to a three brigade structure which would cause a range of unnecessary inefficiencies, such as an increased administrative burden arising from the need to re-introduce a layer of non-operational middle management, and a return to under-strength units. 

Given the unique and demanding nature of military life, there is understandably a very high level of turnover among Defence Forces personnel. However, this is not new and pre-dates the 2012 re-organisation. The Defence Forces have always had a large turnover of approximately 500 personnel on an annual basis. Moreover, a certain level of turnover is of course desirable as a human resources and organisational objective in order to maintain an appropriate age profile across the Defence Forces and to retain an approach to regular revitalisation.

In order to ameliorate the challenges associated with the turnover of personnel, a continuous yearly recruitment drive is operated by the Defence Forces and in 2017 it is planned to recruit 860 personnel across all services.

Additionally, the Defence Forces operates a scheme of voluntary exit interviewing of personnel of all ranks and from all services to ascertain any potential trends or future challenges. The reasons provided are many fold and can range from economic factors, to family circumstances, lifestyle, and a desire for a change in career.

One of the key policies supporting personnel retention is the opportunity for extensive personal and professional development offered by the Defence Forces through accredited courses, and a unique range of careers. But it is also the case that the extensive professional training they receive makes them very attractive to the private sector. It is acknowledged that the resurgence in the private sector jobs market is impacting on the Defence Forces at this time.

In terms of pay, the position is that the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Acts of 2009-2015 and the Public Service Stability Agreement 2013-2018 (Lansdowne Road Agreement) define current pay policy across the public service.

The Defence Forces Climate Survey published in 2016 was conducted in order to inform consideration of the ongoing human resource and strategic needs of the Defence Forces. The Survey findings clearly point to challenges for the Defence Forces, particularly in the areas of leadership, communication, organisational culture, the working environment and active management of personal expectations. However, many positives also emanated from the Survey, especially in relation to the commitment of personnel to the values and mission of the Organisation, high levels of work satisfaction, pride in the Organisation and positive views on culture and work support.