Home Equity Assistance & "Military Families Pushed to Financial Ruin" (Merge)

[40below]

Posts that contain a personal attack should be summarily deleted, and the user should normally receive a warning. Personal attacks detract from the professionalism of the site and can sometimes cause serious problems for Milnet.ca as a whole.

Thanks for the link, George. So claiming someone is on the  "Welfare Gravy Train" is against site guidelines? Someone should delete that post and put the user on warning.

 

[George Wallace]

Posts that contain a personal attack should be summarily deleted, and the user should normally receive a warning. Personal attacks detract from the professionalism of the site and can sometimes cause serious problems for Milnet.ca as a whole.

Thanks for the link, George. So claiming someone is on the  "Welfare Gravy Train" is against site guidelines? Someone should delete that post and put the user on warning.

Thank you 40below.  Of course you did read the whole topic and therefore know to what that reference was made?  Perhaps you would be so kind as to PM me the name of the member of this site to whom we are referring to?  As is, there is a member posting in this topic who does have some answering to do, and for now you can rest assured that it isn't you..........yet.  :nod:

 

[armyvern]

Posts that contain a personal attack should be summarily deleted, and the user should normally receive a warning. Personal attacks detract from the professionalism of the site and can sometimes cause serious problems for Milnet.ca as a whole.

Thanks for the link, George. So claiming someone is on the  "Welfare Gravy Train" is against site guidelines? Someone should delete that post and put the user on warning.

Hmmmm, I'm wondering if you were referring to me?
I haven't said anyone posting in this thread was "on the welfare gravy-train" as you claim in your post. So, what is against site guidelines? I actually told someone (Maritimegal) that "IR was an option" given the financial implications that their house sale would cause; also said that release was. And, those are facts <--- as well as options.

I used the term "welfare-gravy train" in describing the situation/reasoning of one of MY friends who has NO basis for requesting IR (no kids at home; no kids in school; she doesn't work, and they don't own a house). They intend to apply for IR anyway simply because she just doesn't want to move. Those are also facts. It is also a fact that she is not the only one out there. THOSE people are riding the IR gravy-train - and I'm wondering when stuff like that is going to end.

Moe then posted a comment in ref to the indivdual (my friend) that I posted about. As did George. No violation of any site guideline there either.

This is all relevant to this topic simply because Maritimegal made the suggestion that the CF, in the future, STOP postings for a year or so in cases where markets are volitile or losing money on homesales would occur. I'm pointing out that THAT is not a viable option. Such an act may have financial benefit to her family in that she may lose less money if postings to that location for CF members were delayed until the next year, BUT that means others who are already there stagnating in their careers already for 10 years are stuck there longer or that others (who shouldn't be posted anywhere that year) instead end up posted in to the location IR to fill posns where people are releasing/retiring etc at the expense of THEIR families on a temp basis until the ppostings that Maritimegal suggested be "stopped for the year" start up again.

No one relishes this situation. It's not nice. But it needs to be clear, it's also "not nice" when looking after one family has the opposite effect on another. That happens all too often and I'm quite happy to see the pendulum swing the other way. I understand Happy Gilmore's comments only too well. I understand that I've done 3 IRs away from my family (for the reasons stated earlier); I also understand that my family has still moved 7 times in 22 years despite my IRs and despite all my being away from home on tours & taskings. I also understand that the reason my family HAS moved those 7 times is because others have refused moves (for whatever reasons: loss of FOA etc) to some of those spots I went to fill. And, as I also already said, that little fact is also causing releases; lots of them in the past couple of years. And that's sad to see - especially when we exists in a CF these days where some people think 4 moves in their entire career are "way too many" and bad for their QoL. Some of us only dream of finally getting a posting where our families can stay in one place for more than 3 years and don't find ourselves posted out again when one of our co-workers refuses because "nope, no can do" after he's already been there 6 or 7 or 10.

 

[Neill McKay]

I don't mean to take this thread too far off-track, but one thing that's been noted a couple of times is the lack of available PMQs at various bases.  I find that surprising, given that the regular force is, even net of recent expansion, quite a bit smaller than it was a few decades ago.  If anything I'd expect there to be a surplus of military housing.  Is it just a matter of the Crown being very thorough in divesting itself of surplus housing during the lean years, or what?

 

[George Wallace]

I don't mean to take this thread too far off-track, but one thing that's been noted a couple of times is the lack of available PMQs at various bases.  I find that surprising, given that the regular force is, even net of recent expansion, quite a bit smaller than it was a few decades ago.  If anything I'd expect there to be a surplus of military housing.  Is it just a matter of the Crown being very thorough in divesting itself of surplus housing during the lean years, or what?

That would seem to be sensible, but what the CF has done in many places, is demolish Qtrs.  Why?  With the method that they pay "taxes" of specifically monies in lieu of taxes to municipalities calculated on square footage of buildings on Base, monies were saved by demolition of buildings.  In 1995 CFB Petawawa demolished 95+ buildings, which included Messes, Qtrs, hangars, etc. 

 

[ModlrMike]

I don't mean to take this thread too far off-track, but one thing that's been noted a couple of times is the lack of available PMQs at various bases.  I find that surprising, given that the regular force is, even net of recent expansion, quite a bit smaller than it was a few decades ago.  If anything I'd expect there to be a surplus of military housing.  Is it just a matter of the Crown being very thorough in divesting itself of surplus housing during the lean years, or what?

Something on the order of half the PMQs in Edmonton were sold to Crown Lands when Greisbach closed. As families move out of the Greisbach units, they were in turn rented or sold to the general public. The result now being a PMQ shortage.

 

[armyvern]

I don't mean to take this thread too far off-track, but one thing that's been noted a couple of times is the lack of available PMQs at various bases.  I find that surprising, given that the regular force is, even net of recent expansion, quite a bit smaller than it was a few decades ago.  If anything I'd expect there to be a surplus of military housing.  Is it just a matter of the Crown being very thorough in divesting itself of surplus housing during the lean years, or what?

Gagetown also plowed under a great many singles quarters on base and PMQs. By the responses here to your question so far -- it would seem that taking that action was the "in" thing to do for a period of time.

 

[Wookilar]

In all defence though, those Q's where costing us a metric boatload of money to fix and maintain. Edmonton was not ready for us when we moved from Calgary and the condition of those Q's showed it. When the decision wa made to get rid of Greisbach, the market was very reasonable and there were no real indicators of what was going to happen.

We were already paying Strathcona County $1 mil + in lieu of taxes, I can just imagine what the city was charging us.

Wook

 

[captloadie]

Because policy now dictates that PMQ rates need to match market values, more PMQ's would only alleviate the shortage of housing, but not the cost of living involved. The days of subsidized housing are over, which is one of the offsets of the increased pay rates we received.
I personally can only justify DND owned housing in a few areas. SQs on base for members attending course, or personnel on IR, (everyone else should have to live on the economy) and quarters in areas like Ottawa for people on IR, if the cost analysis made it worth while.

 

[PuckChaser]

So instead of being able to live in a 4bdrm PMQ, the Pte IPC 3 in my shop with 3 kids under 6 would have to move out onto the economy? He's paying close to $800 a month for the PMQ. This guy would be in the poor house if he had to find a civvie house to rent, or trapped in a ridiculous mortgage in a bad part of town with no hope of reselling his house when he's posted. Its not like he's been overseas yet to build up some downpayment money. No PMQs is just as bad as saying there are no depressed markets in Canada.

There should be an adequate number of decent PMQs available at 95% of bases for those who want them. Preference given to low rank and number of kids.

 

[TimBit]

captloadie:

I disagree with you. PMQ's and military housing are a fundamental part of not only military administration, but lifestyle, in most militaries of the western world. Their reason for being is to provide flexibility which the market may not be able to provide. I am sorry, but if you are posted out of season twice in two years from one small community to another, it may not be feasible to find conveniently located affordable housing to suit your family needs. Again, it all comes down to the one thing service personnel are asked to do which few others are: move whenever told wherever told. In this context, Q's provide flexibility, i.e. the choice b/w the economy, if doable, or  another option.

I think Q's on all bases should remain.

 

[captloadie]

With the exception of maybe Edmonton, where else is there a shortage of rental accommodations near areas members get posted to? The issue of cost is supposed to be irrelevant, as PMQs are expected to be at or near market value for the area. I have been posted out twice in two years, one of those time out of season, and guess what I had to do until I sold my old house and found something new? That's right, I went IR.

Lots of companies, and other Government departments move people around, and they normally don't have subsidized housing? Does the RCMP have accommodations for the Mounties in all the little places they get posted too?

And as for the poor private with three kids who couldn't afford to live without a PMQ, really? It is called family planning. Don't have more kids than you can afford to look after.

Anyway, I think we have probably hijacked this thread long enough.

 

[George Wallace]

With the exception of maybe Edmonton, where else is there a shortage of rental accommodations near areas members get posted to?

Ottawa.

Lots of companies, and other Government departments move people around, and they normally don't have subsidized housing? Does the RCMP have accommodations for the Mounties in all the little places they get posted too?

Yes, they do.  If you may have noticed, many of Canada's smaller RCMP Detachments are located in a building that is designed as one half Office, one half living quarters. 

 

[Neill McKay]

Lots of companies, and other Government departments move people around, and they normally don't have subsidized housing?

But, again, there are very few situations in which a company or OGD will require a person to move to a certain place, on a certain date, with very little possibility of saying "no".  "Take this new position in Alberta or you'll never see another promotion in this company" is a possibility, but "You will be the new Regional Director of Tire Recycling in Peace River starting 7 Sep 10 and if you don't like it you can take two weeks' notice" is extremely rare, and certainly not a routine part of anyone's career progression outside of the regular force.

And as for the poor private with three kids who couldn't afford to live without a PMQ, really? It is called family planning. Don't have more kids than you can afford to look after.

Not a bad point at all.

 

[acooper]

And as for the poor private with three kids who couldn't afford to live without a PMQ, really? It is called family planning. Don't have more kids than you can afford to look after.

What you call "family planning" doesn't always fit with the morals or religious compulsions of a CF Member, however. Are you saying that someone shouldn't join the forces and serve their country simply because they want a large family? Essentially, I don't think you know enough about that private's situation to criticize him.

I think it's entirely reasonable for at least SOME housing like the PMQs to be available. Not everyone wants them, or needs them. But some people need them, because of various situations. And some people want them, again, for varying reasons.

We're moving into one of the SHHO units in Ottawa, and looked at the PMQs. Without those options, we wouldn't be able to afford to live in Ottawa, even with one child, until my husband finishes his GeoTech course. From what I can tell, the SHHO and PMQs are priced a little under market value for Ottawa. I haven't fully read through this thread, but has anyone done an analysis of what it would cost the CF to keep a family separated and the CF member on IR vs building/maintaining some PMQs and/or SHHO units to house a percentage of the junior ranks expected to be posted to a given area?

 

[Neill McKay]

What you call "family planning" doesn't always fit with the morals or religious compulsions of a CF Member, however. Are you saying that someone shouldn't join the forces and serve their country simply because they want a large family?

I would suggest that the real point is that a person -- whatever his or her occupation -- shouldn't have more kids than he or she can afford to feed and house.

 

[acooper]

I would suggest that the real point is that a person -- whatever his or her occupation -- shouldn't have more kids than he or she can afford to feed and house.

That theory may work fine for you, and for me, as well, but it's simply not compatible with some people's way of life, religion, morals, etc. I've seen many families live well, with many kids, on a relatively small income.  What I think it comes down to is that the CF should be providing affordable housing for its members WHO NEED IT. Not for the higher ranks who make plenty to live on the economy, but for those of lower ranks who wish to serve their country, and whose families are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to support those wishes.

This, of course, assumes the answer I'm expecting to my previous question - that it's more affordable to build and maintain PMQs than to keep all those members separated from their families on IR...

 

[dapaterson]

Pte pay: $32-47K.  Cpl pay: $53 - 57K.  Non-specialist.  Spec pay can get a Cpl up to $69K.  These are not starvation wages.

The CF provides a healthy compensation package.  The pension plan is one of the best in the country, with the employer paying roughly 2/3 of the cost.  Full medical and dental coverage, plus spousal and dependant coverage through the PSHCP at no cost to the member.  Adding more to the compensation package, in the form of subsidized housing, is unsustainable in this fiscal environment.  Adding a benefit that only some receive (such as subsidized housing)  unfairly penalizes those who do not take advantage of it.  Initiatives like PLD provide support.


There has been a deliberate effort to get government out of businesses where there is a local market to meet needs.  Housing, in most base locations, is one of those things.

 

[Neill McKay]

That theory may work fine for you, and for me, as well, but it's simply not compatible with some people's way of life, religion, morals, etc.

Then let me say much the same thing as I said before, but turn it the other way: a person who chooses  - for any reason - to have a large family should find a job that will provide enough income to support that family.  If he or she can find such a job in the Forces, then that's great.  If not, keep looking.

This, of course, assumes the answer I'm expecting to my previous question - that it's more affordable to build and maintain PMQs than to keep all those members separated from their families on IR...

That's a pretty important question, but also a complex one.

 

[PuckChaser]

I guess the dinosaur attitude of "the Army didn't issue you that family" never really goes away, does it?

Sure, we don't need PMQs. Must not need the MFRC, or the Canex either. I'm sure if you told a family of 5 (heck even 4) that instead of their $800 a month PMQ, they have to spend $1000 on a mortgage, plus utilities, plus property tax, they'd have some choice words thrown in your general direction. Oh, but they could live 45 minutes out of town and spend 80 bucks a week on gas even in a good mileage 4 cylinder car just to get back and forth to work.