Supporting army reservists

by 01 Nov 2011

To maximise engagement and communicate corporate values, many organisations are considering the benefits of using external activities of staff to expand the skill-sets of their workforce outside traditional modes of workplace learning and development.

One such external activity being supporting by the Kogarah City Council in Sydney’s south, which has become a supportive employer of employee involvement in the Australian Defence Force through the Defence Reserves Support (DRS); a program run within the Cadet, Reserve and Employer Support Division.

In a statement, the council said it sees its relationship with the army reserves program as a way to demonstrate its community engagement, and as a way to develop an ongoing productive relationship with its employees.

Alison Hester, HR manager at Kogarah City Council, said that when the council signed the agreement, it was done with the realisation that it would be mutually beneficial.

“We employ several reservists and see enormous advantages in granting them extra leave for defence training and deployments. In this way we are seeking to become an “employer of choice”, an important point of difference in an increasingly competitive employment marketplace,” Hester said.

Council policy is to grant employees two weeks of paid defence leave per year, and also to allow them extra periods of leave to fulfil any additional defence commitments.

 

Latest News

Melbourne cup not a reason to skip work
Workplace values misalignment
Australian HR Awards celebrate industry's finest
 

Most Discussed

COMMENTS

Most Read

  • How Netflix reinvented HR

    The former chief talent officer of streaming giant Netflix explains how the company created a ‘Culture Deck’ that has since gone viral.

  • The eight archetypes of leadership

    A leading academic in leadership development has outlined eight leadership ‘archetypes’ that HR should be able to recognise – but why?

  • ANZ 'respectfully declines' Human Rights Commissioner's request

    The big-name bank caused controversy after refusing the Human Rights Commission’s recommended remedy for the ‘hurt and suffering’ it caused a job candidate, who failed to disclose an armed robbery conviction.