If I was emperor, I’d offer a 50k signing bonus at the Sgt being promoted to WO level. With a caveat of years to serve. Or split that in chunks. Promoted to MCpl? 10k. promoted to Sgt 15k. Get to warrant? 25k. Total payment of 50k over your career with time owed in between each promotion. Would encourage advancement and I’m pretty sure from a macro perspective would save money over time. Not sure if that would be enough to retain though.
Allowances - Post Living Differential (PLD) [MERGED]
- Thread starter Sub_Guy
- Start date
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 9,549
- Points
- 1,260
Why did you get out of the CAF ?
- Reaction score
- 5,522
- Points
- 1,360
Heart wasn't into it anymore. Signed for 3, stayed for 10, left with zero grudges.
Love the institution for saving a scrawny punk ass shit like I was....
- Reaction score
- 5,522
- Points
- 1,360
You think folks stab to get ahead now??
I like the concept but just go years served bonuses......why punish the Corporal who rocks at his job, but doesn't want to play the "look at me" game?
No, but it’s a false comparison. A benefit languishing for 15 years like that in a unionized environment is unlikely. Also, this was employer driven, not union. I expect my union to try to get as much total compensation for me as possible in the circumstances. But I expect CAF as an employer and as a prolific spender of public funds to try to do so responsibly. As someone pointed out to me elsewhere, PLD/CFHD aren’t pay; they’re allowances. I’m live to this- and the purpose of this allowance is to make certain postings livable at a basic standard; equity up to a certain bare livable minimum, as opposed to equality.
If CFHD had emerged onto a blank slate, it wouldn’t be too bad- though the 7 years limit still has to go, instead going with continuing proof of rent or mortgage payments. Because it’s replacing PLD, high just Oprahed cash on everyone, it obviously comes up short for many impacted at higher income levels. But- had PLD been properly revisited, a bunch of people would have lost money anyway.
As I see it, this is designed to promote recruiting and protect retention. Retention of trades that face significant manning shortfalls in high cost of housing areas is the metric to measure this against. (I’ve kept using ‘cost of living’, sorry- @ballz called me on that. This is a housing benefit.)
I stand by my belief that it was disingenuous to roll this out at the same time as the lay raise. I also believe the sun-inflation pay raise is inadequate. Both of those facts have obfuscated the CFHD discussion. Essentially CAF has said “we’re gonna let everyone’s pay shrink a bit through inflation, and pay a housing allowance on a needs basis”. The first part of that I’m not cool with.
Yeah, there’s some merit to this as a separate pay/comp thing. Add a percent or two pensionable allowance every four or five years just for sticking it out. A lot of employers in my profession do this.
- Reaction score
- 1,332
- Points
- 1,260
Retention / Recognition / Service pay started with the Toronto police force, which was losing officers to out of town police services.
It quickly spread as a parity issue through arbitration.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 9,549
- Points
- 1,260
Why wasn't your heart in it anymore ? Reg or reserve ?
- Reaction score
- 6,333
- Points
- 1,310
I would do an IE25 bonus. Hear me out:
-5K bonus for signing an IE25 after your VIE
-10K at 12 Years
-25K at 25 years and another 10K if you sign an IPS
-all bonuses would be taxable, but could be rolled directly into an RRSP or TFSA without tax.
That's a potential 60K over 20 years. Given that the cost to train a CAF member to Sgt can run well over double that, it would help protect the CAF's investment while also having incremental "well I mean... That's a lot of money.." periods within a member's service.
-5K bonus for signing an IE25 after your VIE
-10K at 12 Years
-25K at 25 years and another 10K if you sign an IPS
-all bonuses would be taxable, but could be rolled directly into an RRSP or TFSA without tax.
That's a potential 60K over 20 years. Given that the cost to train a CAF member to Sgt can run well over double that, it would help protect the CAF's investment while also having incremental "well I mean... That's a lot of money.." periods within a member's service.
I think a lot people don’t actually want progression. No real incentive.
It isn’t about punishing anyone. Cpl so and so can keep rocking it. It’s about rewarding those that progress. And would Likely be the ones needed to move, instruct etc more than the cpl who doesn’t want any of that responsibility. In the US they have an up or out concept. Can’t afford to do that here but this at least would have an incentive.
We are hurting at that middle segment of mid leadership and expertise. Need some way to retain that.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 9,549
- Points
- 1,260
I think youre right. I think many folks would pick geographic stability work life balance over progression. But we don't encourage people to be "Golden Corporals". I would love to a Dept full of good GCs. They are worth their weight in gold.
We need up or out for the ranks WO and above, officers included.
Our PO1 and PO2 levels are a disaster in my trade in Halifax.
- Reaction score
- 5,285
- Points
- 1,040
I'm not a fan of 'up or out' it leads to rank inflation for the jobs, not less people. Most of our current trades bottleneck really hard at WO and Maj levels, so unless we overrank a lot of jobs we will lose a lot of people that we need doing work. If you think we have too many GOFOs now...
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 9,549
- Points
- 1,260
I think we need to limit how long someone can sit in the MWO/CWO ranks without progression.
This is not where we want stagnation.
- Reaction score
- 5,391
- Points
- 1,140
It takes impressive mental gymnastics to be cool with your union fighting for as much as they can get, but wanting the CAF to be "responsible" with public funds.
How so? Expect your union to fight for as much as they can. Expect the organisation to be responsible with the public funds they are given.
- Reaction score
- 262
- Points
- 780
As a group, I can see that some want the best of both worlds and are going to complain either way. Look at all the comments about how the 7 year limit is going to screw over the troops, and woe is the Navy who rarely move from each coast. Or how you can spend as many as 10 years or more in Cold Lake or on other Wings. Yet, in the very next sentence, the argument is made that CAF members are special because they are forced to move so often without any say. CAF members should be better compensated for this inconvenience in life and the financial impact it has.
And before someone throws in the unlimited liability argument, while it applies to us all, very few actually need to live it throughout their career.
The policy and EI aren't perfect, and will likely need to be refined. But at least it was something. If members need to move on to a civilian career to better their position in life, we should wish them well, and hope they are happy and successful.
And before someone throws in the unlimited liability argument, while it applies to us all, very few actually need to live it throughout their career.
The policy and EI aren't perfect, and will likely need to be refined. But at least it was something. If members need to move on to a civilian career to better their position in life, we should wish them well, and hope they are happy and successful.
- Reaction score
- 5,391
- Points
- 1,140
We don't get a union, this is a close to fighting for more as we can get. Having unionized public sector employees come in here and tell us to be content with what we are given is frankly ridiculous...
That isn't true. Every dollar above that 25% is considered a taxable benefit. So while they won't pay more than 25% in shelter costs, they will pay more come tax time. It still helps but it isn't the benefit some think it is. Even in Esquimalt, everyone over Cpl/S1 makes more than enough pay the full rent on all but the largest, nicest Q's. If you wife works at Tim Horton's you probably don't qualify for relief on those.
It's like the high CFHD for people in the training system where most people won't be able to draw it. It is a great talking point but that is about all its good for.
I don't know if you are East or West Coast but using Halifax rates, promotion to S1 is now
We are 20 percent short in the CAF, in any other industry a labour shortage of 20% would involve massive increases in pay to attract labour. A not quite Cola tempered by losing money due to an "equitable" reduction in housing allowance isn't going to be a huge driver of recruiting and it is going to have a negative effect on recruiting. I saw one report of 25 percent of platoon sized department putting in VRs over this. Strictly anecdotal at this point but it matches all the opinions I'm hearing.
Edit: Math was wrong. Fixed.
Last edited:
That isn’t at all what he was getting at.
