Reserve Defence Forces being hit by 'nonsensical' retirement rules, warns association

A member of the Reserve Defence Forces training in Wicklow. Picture: Photocall Ireland.

The Reserve Defence Forces (RDF) is suffering from the impact of a change in “nonsensical” retirement rules which they say is “getting rid of members unnecessarily” and resulting in numbers being severely depleted.

All reservists who enlisted before October 2005 are allowed serve until the age of 60.

However, anyone enlisted after that date must retire at 50.

Neil Richardson, general secretary of the organisation which represents them, the Reserve Defence Forces Representative Association (RDFRA), said as a result they are now seeing a number of personnel, who joined the RDF in 2006 or 2007 in their 30s, reaching the age where they will be forced to retire from the service.

“This is despite the fact that they are fully capable of continuing in service and wish to do so,” Mr Richardson said.

“Furthermore, former members of the PDF (Permanent Defence Forces) and the RDF can join, or re-join, the RDF up to the age of 45. For such personnel who join at the upper age limit, this means they would only be allowed to serve for five years before being discharged when they could potentially serve for 15 years if the regulations were amended,” he said.

Reserve numbers

The RDF strength has fallen significantly in recent years. The minimum strength of the army reserve should be 3,869 and the minimum for the navy 200.

However, just 755 army reservists undertook paid training last year, along with only 64 reservists in the navy.

Mr Richardson said with such few remaining, getting rid of members unnecessarily, who have potentially ten good years left to serve, “is nonsensical".

 He said his association has raised the issue with the Department of Defence on multiple occasions in recent months but has been told that the issue must be referred to the Department of Public Expenditure & Reform (DPER).

Mr Richardson said RDFRA would argue that this issue does not need to be referred to DPER, on the following grounds: The regulations governing the establishment of the RDF outlines how many of each rank are allowed to exist. This establishment is ministerially approved and has a formal annual budgetary allocation. Therefore, so long as the RDF is not looking to exceed the establishment for each rank, it should be of no concern to DPER whether the individual personnel holding these ranks are aged under 50 or over 50.

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here

In addition, Mr Richardson said RDF pay rates do not differ between those enlisted pre- or post-October 2005, and reservists do not accrue any pension entitlements for their service — so the retention of one group of reservists over the other is no more or less expensive.

“There are plenty of other mechanisms — such as medical testing and fitness testing — to ensure that reservists are able to undertake their various roles; arbitrarily deciding that everyone who enlisted after October 2005, and who has now reached the age of 50, is somehow incapable of rendering valuable reserve service on age grounds alone does not stand up to scrutiny,” Mr Richardson said.