7 minute read
Industrial
I
INDUSTRIAL Government action on emergency speed limit long overdue
You could almost think police ministers and attorneys-general, from either side of politics, actually mean it when they say how deeply they care about police. They make the claim so frequently. You hear it in press conferences, out on the hustings, and in day-to-day dealings with them.
But if ministers really do care about the safety and well-being of police on the street, they have the funniest way of showing it. Just consider a couple of examples of the recent few years.
There was the Return to Work Act, which the Weatherill Labor government was quite happy to introduce in 2014.
It seemed not to matter to the cabinet ministers of the time that the legislation was a complete abandonment of police officers injured in the line of duty.
After two- and three-year caps on income maintenance and medical expenses kicked in, injured police were going to have to fend for themselves. Some were likely, after a time, to face financial ruin.
The Police Association campaigned against the legislation and won.
Then there was the battle the association had to fight to get weakkneed assault-police laws strengthened. It was obvious that tougher penalties would serve as a greater deterrent and therefore make police safer.
But that argument did not initially persuade the Marshall Liberal government. Nor did example after example of front-line police left with appalling assault injuries, like severed tendons and broken ribs. So, the association appeal now is to a fourth police minister, Vincent Tarzia, to listen to the collective voice of frustrated association members and instigate change.
Again, in the interests of police-officer safety, the Police Association had to get the law changed by means of a campaign.
The problem is that, too often, politicians claim to care about police but then fail to prove it with timely, supportive legislation.
And the problem continues with the total lack of action on the 25km/h Emergency Services speed limit (section 83, Road Traffic Act).
As far back as 2016, the Police Association warned then-police minister Tony Piccolo that the speed limit was endangering rather than protecting police.
The issue, particularly in zones with speed limits as high as 110km/h, was that drivers had to brake so suddenly to comply with the 25km limit. In many cases, other drivers had crashed into them from behind.
In December 2019, two cars collided head-on near Tailem Bend. One driver had been slowing for a 25km emergencyservice speed zone.
In that zone, two motorcycle officers with lights flashing had stopped to help a motorist whose caravan had lost a wheel.
The vehicle slowing for the 25km zone, and crashed into by the other vehicle, spun out of control and smashed into one of the police bikes.
By sheer good luck, neither officer was on that bike at the time. And many other police officers have wound up in near-miss situations just like that one.
In the last five years, the Police Association has outlined the dangers of the 25km/h limit, and the need for change, to three now former police ministers – Tony Piccolo, Peter Malinauskas and Corey Wingard.
Each minister, for whatever reason, failed to bring about that change.
And the close calls keep coming. Just two months ago, police in an unmarked car, with its red and blue lights flashing, stopped a B-triple combination heavy vehicle on the Eyre Highway.
This automatically created a 25km/h emergency-service speed zone. And then came a light vehicle, slowing down on its approach to the zone, with a road train travelling behind it.
The road train, however, failed to reduce its speed and veered onto the dirt verge. That left it heading directly for the stationary police car at high speed.
Of the two police officers on the scene, one was inside the car. That officer had to react with lightning speed to move the car out of the path of the road train.
Without that swift, evasive action, the incident might well have ended in fatalities.
So, the association appeal now is to a fourth police minister, Vincent Tarzia, to listen to the collective voice of frustrated association members and instigate change.
In a letter to Minister Tarzia in December, I indicated that the “association and its members require feedback from the government about appropriate action…”
On matters that concern police-officer safety, the association is relentless – and intends to be in this case. I trust Minister Tarzia responds as swiftly as did the officer who had to avoid the road train.
INDUSTRIAL Leadership in traffic policing
The SAPOL organizational review of 2015 brought about the centralization of metropolitan traffic by dissolving the individual LSA traffic sections.
The formal creation of brevet sergeants came about under this model to recognize the informal second-incharge position in the Road Policing Section team structure.
The associated consultation paper indicated that it was SAPOL’s intention to create an environment which provided greater supervisory support to front-line traffic members:
With the inclusion of a sergeant and a brevet sergeant on each team, rather than an informal 2nd-in-charge arrangement, it is believed there will be a far greater focus on operational support providing an enhanced service delivery to the community. In addition, this will provide a greater focus on leadership in the field and across teams.
The association knows of the dissension in the TSB membership – in which only the Road Policing teams have a substantive second-in-charge brevet sergeant position.
The expansion of the brevet sergeant classification aligns with South Australia Police Our Strategy 2020, which highlights that SAPOL will “invest in developing our people as leaders in the business of policing”.
The Corporate Business Plan 2020-23 (Safer Communities – The Road Map) highlights that the plan is to build on organizational reform activities and facilitate organizational growth opportunities.
The third programme of the plan (Road Safety) dictates priorities, including behaviours of innovative practices, targeting, developing highimpact evidence, education, collaborating and engaging to address road safety.
The documentation reflects the significance of road safety to the community and the necessity for organizational growth.
State Budget 2020-21 agency statement (South Australia Police) reaffirmed the significance of road safety in its key agency outputs: • Providing road safety services including enforcing road rules, regulating road use and educating the community on safe road-user practices. • Targeting dangerous and high-risk driving behaviours across the state, with a focus on recidivist offenders, speed, drink or drug driving, wearing seat belts, distraction, and vulnerable road users.
Historically, TSB had supervisory second-in-charge positions. The Focus 21 discussion paper Review of Traffic Services Division (June 8, 1999) identified that the then State Highway Task Force (SHTF) consisted of three teams and an escort section. A senior sergeant managed the SHTF and reported to the officer-in-charge of the Traffic Services Division.
The discussion paper identified “three teams led by a sergeant, senior constable and constables”. The escort section consisted of a co-ordinating sergeant (reporting to the senior sergeant SHTF), senior constables and ordinary ranks.
The discussion paper indicated that Southern and Northern operations services each consisted of three teams of a sergeant, senior constables and ordinary ranks. The ongoing lack of brevet sergeant positions has the potential to put TSB members at a disadvantage —in comparison to their colleagues — in locations in which brevet sergeants are now in place.
The term “led” is relevant as it highlights that the organizational design was structured to ensure a formal second-in-charge.
The discussion paper highlighted the significance of the Tactical Coordination Group in the LSA in which “tactical decisions are based on intelligence analysis as a precursor to the effective and efficient deployment of resources on a day-to-day basis”.
The deployment and allocation of resources requires supervision and accountability only achievable by members who, in a supervisory position, “lead” members in their duties (a sergeant and formal second-in-charge).
Under clause 32.1 of the 2004 enterprise agreement, the “senior constable in-situ” progression enabled constables to progress to senior constable five years after permanent appointment (subject to the qualification of senior constable).
The agreement has enabled a significant proportion of SAPOL members to attain the rank of senior constable.
A new rank of brevet sergeant was introduced in EA 2004, operative from January 1, 2005. Under clause 10.5, the commissioner of police determined the functions to which the brevet sergeant ranks applied.
This rank was extended from specialist areas to include general-duties policing and to recognize a formal second-in-charge.
In the 2016 traffic restructure, Road Policing Section implemented brevet sergeants as part of its team structure.
