PROMOTION BY DRIFT.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 10 November 1939, Page 4

PROMOTION BY DRIFT.

j.\_T ie conference of the New Zealand Police Association, which was held in Wellington last week, some attention was given to highly important questions of length of service and rate of promotion—questions which have been discussed often in this country and thus far with small effect. Members 01. the association pointed out that in every other police force tn the British Empire men were retired five to ten years sooner than in New Zealand and it was maintained that it is not in the public interest to expect constables to carry on until they are 65 years of age. With that contention it seems impossible to do anything else than agree. A certain amount of flexibility may be desirable in regard to the retiring age of executive officers, but a retiring age of 65 years surely is too high lor the rank and filo members of a force liable Io be called upon at any time for duty involving strenuous physical activity.

The rate of promotion also g'reatly needs attention where the Police Force is concerned. One speaker al the conference is reported to have stated that a man had to serve for over years in the force before he reached commissioned rank, and even to obtain his first promotion (from constable to sergeant) had to serve 16 years or more. Possibly it may bo shown that these limits have been departed from in some exceptional instances, but there is ample evidence that the general rule of promotion in the Police Force is one of slow progress governed very largely by seniority. It is evidently as little in the public interest as in that of exceptionally able members of the Police Force that this rule should be allowed to continue. The man who is capable of discharging responsible duties al the age of fifty or more undoubtedly would be able to handle these duties more effectively tit a considerably earlier age and it evidently cannot make for efficient and progressive organisation and control that the positions of highest responsibility in the Police Force should be reserved almost exclusively for officers who are approaching fairly closely the retiring age.

Promotion by qualification and merit, irrespective of seniority, is the alternative that obviously suggests itself ami if need not impede the adoption of that alternative that il would in effect, divide the Police Force into two sections— a small section qualifying for and obtaining fairly rapid promotion and a much larger section of necessity accepting more limited prospects. A division on these lines appears to be an inescapable condition of obtaining yonlhl’nl, vigorous and progressive leadership in any organisation. There etui bo no doubt I hat the public interest demands that the highest possible standards of ability should be established and maintained in Ihe Police Force and it. is equally apparent that in existing conditions with regard to promotion that demand cannot possibly be satisfied in full measure. Apart from the fact that slow promotion by seniority must have a dulling effect on men ol ability who enter the force, the instil id ion of promotion by qualitical ion and merit naturally would attract increased numbers of men of a progressive, enterprising, and ambitious type