Benefits Cut...

[Scott]

You might be surprised to find out it is not relevant.

You might be likely aren't at all surprised at what some people will try to argue.

 

[Northern Ranger]

You might be surprised to find out it is not relevant.

Or is relevant.  Time will only tell.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

Or is relevant.  Time will only tell.

Stop being obtuse. Please explain to me how we, 'serving members of the CF' have legal recourse when the Treasury Board changes our compensation and benefits. What legal ground is there for this? Show me precedence? Do you think we can take this to arbitration or somethings?

 

[Northern Ranger]

Serving members (and as stated I am no longer)  have many avenues that I think some one could go to, be it against the TBS or the CF.  You do have the CF Grievnce board, the ombudsman and lastly the media,  Do you recall standing in food lines back in 1997 at food banks (I don't)in Nova Scotia and the media feast on that.  Shortly after that we had SCONDA, look at the pay raises that followed.

Do you recall when the a member was hurt on tour and they took away his danger pay because he was in hostpital, and due to a father talking to the press, the Govt reversed that, just think a member getting something that he isn't earning.

I would also like to make it clear on what I am talking about. To me its about the time that they intend to implement this, 60 days notice, give me a break, If the TBS/DND/ any other dept, changed the rules of what I'm entitlled to after the "point of departure" I would spend some time trying to fight it.  They would never change the max  hotel rate for a city mid stride on a TD trip would they, can you immagine if they did, the out cry from all the departments would be huge.

Its not for me to provide the presedence etc, but rather for those that have been effected by this rash decision that I think is screwing over the rank and file of those on PAT etc and just taking an IR only weeks ago for a valid reason to find out everything has changed its for them to search and do the work.  If they feel its wrong they will do something I'm sure and if they think, hey thats ok, I can take the hit, atleast we will have F35's in 12 years.........

My intial post was for that of an opion, if your looking for answers, sorry can't provide.  If you totaly disagree with it thats fine too, have a good one, hope it works out for those effected. Out.

 

[Strike]

Serving members (and as stated I am no longer)  have many avenues that I think some one could go to, be it against the TBS or the CF.  You do have the CF Grievnce board, the ombudsman and lastly the media,  Do you recall standing in food lines back in 1997 at food banks (I don't)in Nova Scotia and the media feast on that.  Shortly after that we had SCONDA, look at the pay raises that followed.

I also remember seeing many people being interviewed by CBC et al. in front of their PMQs, whose driveways held SUVs, RVs and/or power boats.

Do you recall when the a member was hurt on tour and they took away his danger pay because he was in hostpital, and due to a father talking to the press, the Govt reversed that, just think a member getting something that he isn't earning.

And I remember how many colleagues disagreed with the move because it was felt members would then start spending money they did not yet have or had earned.  It also grated on people that the guy's father got involved since he probably did not know where this regulation was coming from.

I also know how annoyed members get when either a serving member of family member goes to the press to complain about a perceived fault without having all the facts.

Neither of these comparisons is really reflective of what is going on here, if only because the full directive has not come out.  There are many people much higher than any of us, and a few Sr members who are working hard to ensure there is proper guidance and direction, especially to those who will be most affected.

I know that sometimes going to the press is warranted, but until the full direction comes out, I'm going to have to say that it's not in this case.  If a member or their other half went to the media right now, they would likely be seen by many of their colleagues as whining about something that they still don't fully comprehend, forget the fact that said member would then likely have to deal with their chain of command.

Media assessment and how people react to media reports is what I do, so this is not just a half-assed guess.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Ranger is not happy that he now has to pay to move Mr Whiskers and Stanley.

 

[Jungle]

All, changing the rules is one thing, implementing those changes is another. From what I hear, it may not be as drastic as some have speculated here.

Wait out.

 

[FSTO]

All, changing the rules is one thing, implementing those changes is another. From what I hear, it may not be as drastic as some have speculated here.

Wait out.

Great, more confusion. Why can't they sort themselves out before they release the CANFORGEN?

 

[McG]

SE is $26.55 (65% of the evening meal rate)....there is no incidental amount.  ...

Incidental amounts are not payed...at least to those in the NCR.

According to the CBI, SE is not based on your location (ie - NCR vs Shilo).  It is based on on the type of accommodation you have.

What my main concern is, and what nobody else has mentioned, is the loss of MLI and the mortgage penalties.  And yes I know we are supposed to get Portable Mortgages (mine is btw). 

Having a portable mortgage also does not help if you were a home owner but conditions at destination require you to move into a rental property or PMQ - If you sell but do not buy, you have to break your mortgage as a result of the move.

I wonder if there is any movement to consider a leagal course of action.  You would think that the change would some how come across as a breach of contract.

Serving members (and as stated I am no longer)  have many avenues that I think some one could go to, be it against the TBS or the CF.  You do have the CF Grievnce board, the ombudsman and lastly the media,  ...

Not a breach of contract, but potentially negligent misrepresentation.  The crown is seen as monolithic - if the crown was advising you on financial entitlements & compensation while the crown knew it was going to remove those, then you might be able to claim damages if you incur them because of the changes.  The grievance process has no sway over TB policy/direction.  You would need to make your case to DCCL (see my earlier post).  I really would not recommend crying in the press as a suitable solution.

 

[aesop081]

Having a portable mortgage also does not help if you were a home owner but conditions at destination require you to move into a rental property or PMQ - If you sell but do not buy, you have to break your mortgage as a result of the move.

There are still solutions. My mortgage is 100% open and has zero penalties for early repayment, should i sell and not buy.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

There are still solutions. My mortgage is 100% open and has zero penalties for early repayment, should i sell and not buy.

Unless of course you're Pte Bloggins with an OK yet short credit history and only 5-10% to put down (this is before the new mortgage rules), in which case you are highly unlikely to be able to get a 100% open mortgage, at least not at rates affordable on a 40k p.a. salary.

Just saying...

 

[Grunt]

So you're comparing a Cpl with a police officer? I assume you've not applied to a police force lately? They're a hell of a lot more selective than the CF is, and the degree of individual responsibility greatly exceeds what we see out of most Pte/Cpls. And I don't know why you'd bring up police pay when your sentence started with 'compare with the private sector'.

Gauging from your comment, perhaps you are the one seeing the world through "rose coloured glasses" Mr Brihard, I suggest spending some time in an Infantry Battalian and your perception may change a bit.

Nevertheless have a nice day.

 

[aesop081]

Just saying...

Then don't freakin' buy !!

Rent until you can afford to get the right mortgage. After my divorce (that left me with a less than OK credit record) I rented. No PMQ either, CFHA would not give me one. I saved what i could until i got a mortgage that i could afford and made sense (i knew i was getting posted in 12-24 months). Since i had been in location for a few years, i had to pay everything on my own. I bought just enough to have a place to live with my 2 kids.

When i first got married, it was a while before we had enough to buy my first home.

When did "owning a home right out of the gate" become an entitlement driving our compensation package ?

EDIT: These changes do suck for someone 3 years into a 5-year fixed, i know. Some banks may offer more flex than others and i hope something can be sorted out for them. For those who have yet to buy a home, the new rules are known and there are options.

 

[OldSolduer]

Gauging from your comment, perhaps you are the one seeing the world through "rose coloured glasses" Mr Brihard, I suggest spending some time in an Infantry Battalian and your perception may change a bit.

Nevertheless have a nice day.

And you may want to suck back and reload. I HAVE spent time in a Bn, and cpls do not generally do the same things as cops do.
I am now in a reserve unit and most of our cops are Sgts.

 

[Haggis]

Gauging from your comment, perhaps you are the one seeing the world through "rose coloured glasses" Mr Brihard, I suggest spending some time in an Infantry Battalian and your perception may change a bit.

Grunt, the degree of responsibility, accountability and autonomy of your average Pte/Cpl in the CF comes nowhere near that of a police officer.  The benefits and allowances available to a Pte/Cpl (i.e 1-4 years of service) far exceed those of most police officers (with the possible exception of the RCMP).  Pay, however, is a vastly different kettle of fish.

So, I agree with Brihard.  In the context of this discussion, comparing a civilian police officer to a CF Pte/Cpl is like comparing apples and bricks.

You have a nice day as well.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

Then don't freakin' buy !!

Rent until you can afford to get the right mortgage. After my divorce (that left me with a less than OK credit record) I rented. No PMQ either, CFHA would not give me one. I saved what i could until i got a mortgage that i could afford and made sense (i knew i was getting posted in 12-24 months). Since i had been in location for a few years, i had to pay everything on my own. I bought just enough to have a place to live with my 2 kids.

When i first got married, it was a while before we had enough to buy my first home.

When did "owning a home right out of the gate" become an entitlement driving our compensation package ?

EDIT: These changes do suck for someone 3 years into a 5-year fixed, i know. Some banks may offer more flex than others and i hope something can be sorted out for them. For those who have yet to buy a home, the new rules are known and there are options.

Agreed, you and I are on the same wave length, I was just saying that more junior members/those with less than excellent credit ratings won't be able to get such mortgages. You and I know that in that instance you shouldn't buy, but we also both know that financial common sense is as rare as a PMQ without a Dodge Ram parked in front of it.

 

[Strike]

...but we also both know that financial common sense is as rare as a PMQ without a Dodge Ram parked in front of it.

Or a Porche, which I have seen in the Qs here in Edmonton.  :

 

[blacktriangle]

Or a Porche, which I have seen in the Qs here in Edmonton.  :

Someone mistook a portable mortgage for having a mortgage on something portable...  ;D

 

[Petard]

The timing of this announcement, no matter how you want to twist it, is odd; right in the middle of APS. Why couldn't it of been announced this year that it would be coming into effect next FY? Is there worse yet to come?

By "suck it up", I mean in telling people in the middle of being posted this year that they should have seen this coming, fits that notion. Of course they can do nothing but absorb it. Having it occur like this does not, in my opinion, make it acceptable.  Had it been announced before the start of this FY, it would have allowed those being affected by it this year to of made a more informed decision, whether it was a mortgage term, or the effect it might have on their whole family. Guessing it might be coming is not reasonable to most family members. I understand very well uncertainty is part of the vagaries of being in the service, but to me announcing something like this, makes people suspicious of "what's next?

I too know of quite a few folks that went the IR route, and I wondered why. But I've seen quite a few who were only doing it to keep something of a stable homelife, and/or not sacrifice their spouse's career by making them move too.  Somewhere about last fall, into the winter, when the career manager's were building their posting plots, many people looking at a posting would no doubt have taken into consideration these things, and some would've asked if they could go IR to protect that family life. Part of this assessment is usually the cost to get back to your family, whenever that might be. In a lot of cases some of these benefits will have a direct affect on that frequency.

Some, such as those just starting out in the service, have no choice in the matter and will deal with the consequences; I'm not sure if it would've affected their decision to join or not, if they had known, but we should hear them out to see how they manage (or don't).

Anyone joining the military has got to be honest with themselves that they've got to be willing to accept whatever may come with that decision, check, but some consideration has to be given to our families as these vicissitudes occur.  The timing of this announcement did not allow for any of that.

What this does in the opinion of many I'm seeing on social networks, is question what's next? What else should I suspect is going to be reduced? When might it be announced?
But are there yet more benefit reductions coming? Will there be a significant change in overall unit strengths (such as a large adjustment in the ARE?)
What effect will these reductions have over time? I'm not just talking about the IR thing, but what effect might this have on the availability of trained pers as the uncertainty of other reductions pop up? How many will decide to consider family before service, and leave, rather than risk them all together.

Relatively speaking, I don't see these recent reduction in IR benefits as being that big, but some of the other reductions has had a direct effect on our unit Ops. Maybe these recent benefit reductions really are only minor compared to what's coming next, who knows?

 

[mariomike]

Grunt, the degree of responsibility, accountability and autonomy of your average Pte/Cpl in the CF comes nowhere near that of a police officer.  The benefits and allowances available to a Pte/Cpl (i.e 1-4 years of service) far exceed those of most police officers (with the possible exception of the RCMP).  Pay, however, is a vastly different kettle of fish.

So, I agree with Brihard.  In the context of this discussion, comparing a civilian police officer to a CF Pte/Cpl is like comparing apples and bricks.

You have a nice day as well.

The only non-compensated expense a TPS officer would  have is the cost of attending the Ontario Police College: $7,500.00.

However, they get paid while training at the college: $53,605.

Candidates classified as Cadets in Training are on full benefits.

As far as TPS is concerned, there is no comparison between the military and the police: "Although we appreciate your service in the military, all current and past members of any military service will proceed through the Constable Selection System like any other candidate.":
http://www.torontopolice.on.ca/careers/uni_faq.php#q28