Reservists Job Protection Superthread

[Michael Dorosh]

Doesn't Alberta have that type of legislation in place at present?

No. The Alberta Government may have a policy for government jobs, but civvie employers are not compelled to grant military leave.

 

[JasonH]

This would be incredible news if it turned out that it would come around.  In BC anyways.

Haveing just gotten married and moving into a town house I'm rather stuck at my job makeing 14 an hour in a warehouse and I'd like to try my hand at the reserves once I'm done school in the fall.  Keep the updates coming please, much appreciated 

 

[Chummy]

I believe this is provincial area of responsibility, so while he could encourage it, he could not mandate it. (duh...I think)

While I think employment law can be a provincial area (probably it falls under s.92(13) of the Constitution - property and civil rights), it also could be federal under the regulation of commerce (s.91 (2)), or maybe the catch all Peace Order and Good Government of s. 91 generally. The feds have an Employment Equity Act, but the provinces also have, eg. BC Employment Standards Act. Even if I'm wrong about the dual way to characterize this area (employment law), the Federal government could encroach a bit on a provincial power in this area because the encroachment is small, and is incidental to National Defence. Defence is, of course, an exclusively federal area (s. 91(7)).

 

[Jarnhamar]

In the US, reservists get put on active duty or called up or whatever.  In Canada when a reservist applies for a tour it's completely voluntary.  Isn't that a different circus?

 

[Spring_bok]

Absolutely,.  There is a big difference between active service and volunteering for the experience.  In the US when one is put into active service it is the governments decision and therefore job protection applies.  In Canada a reservist alone makes the decision to deploy therefore why should the employer keep the job open?  Especially in small business it is not practical or economical for the employer or the business.  If one works for an employer that can accommodate this than great, however make it law and you are flirting with discrimination.  My 2 cents.

 

[Spanky]

If job legislation is enacted, then, possibly, reservists will no longer be in a position to only volunteer.  They may be told to go.  Not done since WWII I realize, but things could change.  In terms of small companies, I realize the difficulty, as well as the reservist who runs his/her own business.  What do the smaller companies do when someone goes on a maternity leave?  Could not the same principle apply?

 

[Hot Lips]

If job legislation is enacted, then, possibly, reservists will no longer be in a position to only volunteer.  They may be told to go.  Not done since WWII I realize, but things could change.  In terms of small companies, I realize the difficulty, as well as the reservist who runs his/her own business.  What do the smaller companies do when someone goes on a maternity leave?  Could not the same principle apply?

  Great point...ought to be workable...in a similar fashion...yes?

HL

 

[darmil]

Watch and shoot.

 

[Spring_bok]

If job legislation is enacted, then, possibly, reservists will no longer be in a position to only volunteer.  They may be told to go. 

This sounds like you are putting the cart before the horse.  It is possible however complete reserve units(not to be confused with composite units made up of just reserves)  would have to be deployed.

 

[Gunner]

If job legislation is enacted, then, possibly, reservists will no longer be in a position to only volunteer.  They may be told to go.  Not done since WWII I realize, but things could change. 

The government can do this now through an order in council, even without the proposed job protection legislation (hence it is currently possible).  In reality,for the forseeable future it won't happen unless there is a significant global event requiring mass mobilization of western countries (hence it is not currently probable). 

 

[Michael Dorosh]

If job legislation is enacted, then, possibly, reservists will no longer be in a position to only volunteer.  They may be told to go.  Not done since WWII I realize,

Canadian reservists were never ordered to serve actively in the Second World War or any other time I am aware of.

 

[Old Sweat]

Michael,

I second your comment, especially as it pertains to service outside the country.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Canadian reservists were never ordered to serve actively in the Second World War or any other time I am aware of

But do you know anything about history?

I think ordering Canadian reserves to duty is a good idea.  I'd like to see both individuals and whole regiments called up. Or perhaps even platoon or company size.
"Your regiment/brigade WILL provide X amount of soldiers for this tasking/tour"

Lets face it. Reservists get a hell of a lot of money thrown at them in the form of taskings, courses, live fire shoots etc.. Lots of money is put into training us.  Some part time soldiers turn around and contribute some sit back and rake in the cash while never leaving their comfort zone.

In a perfect world a Canadian reserve regiment should be able to be called up to active duty. Obviously anyone who is in or has worked with the reserves knows this is a VERY long time away.  We should still be able to order reservists to fill qualified positions.


Some current disadvantages.
Reservists who put their lives on hold for a year are not guaranteed (for lack of a better word) a position on tour.  While I suppose this ensures a form of quality control it also means the reserves applying for tours and long taskings are the "class B commandos" like myself who have no other career. Sometimes you may get a good troop, sometimes your going to get a burger flipper.

If reservists were forced to service and a job protection thingie was passed then employers could (and probably would) discriminate against hiring reserves.  I've actually had this done to me, during an interview the guy said he liked me but he wasn't going to hire me because he's had reservists work for him before at they upped and quit at the last second because they were "ordered" to go on such and such a tasking. I don't blame him, I've known quite a few reservists to pull this stunt.
Part time commandos, me for example, fill our a resume and can't help but list army crap as experience and job references because we don't have much else. Makes it very easy for an employer to shit can the job application.

I still think reserve regiments should be able to order it's soldiers to attend 6 month or year taskings such as gate guard duties, duty in mature theaters like Bosnia or supporting the battlegroup in Afghanistan. This way your not getting guys who have nothing better to do. I realise some guys DO have careers school and well to do jobs but in my experience they are the exception over the norm when it comes to these kind of taskings.

 

[Spanky]

This sounds like you are putting the cart before the horse.  It is possible however complete reserve units(not to be confused with composite units made up of just reserves)  would have to be deployed.

Not at all.  Why enact job protection legislation if you are not going to use it.  I understand the Order in Council process, but can not that process be amended?  Times are different now than 60 years ago.  Is it written in stone somewhere that the Order in Council can only be utilized in situations of total war.  I understand that an Order in Council does not require a job protection program, but having one in place may make it more politicaly palatable.

 

[Aislinn]

On the federal level there are laws in place to protect the jobs of reservists who are called up in times war war or national emergency. My husband is having a tough time right now, though, trying to get leave from his job for training. He actually works for the feds and even though they have regulations in place to help employees who are also reservists, they seem disinclined to go by them. Employers seem to be more concerned out of what happens to them if employees go away, then in what employee reservists want or need.

Cheers

 

[the 48th regulator]

Absolutely,.  There is a big difference between active service and volunteering for the experience.  In the US when one is put into active service it is the governments decision and therefore job protection applies.  In Canada a reservist alone makes the decision to deploy therefore why should the employer keep the job open?  Especially in small business it is not practical or economical for the employer or the business.  If one works for an employer that can accommodate this than great, however make it law and you are flirting with discrimination.  My 2 cents.

We allow Job protection for Maternity leave, which promotes the development of our population, why can we not do it for the defense of our nation?

dileas

tess

 

[Haggis]

I concur with Matt Fisher. I have worked in the US for 15 years, and have never seen this - either at my own companies, or at the companies of friends and aquaintances. I have never even heard 2nd- or 3rd hand accounts of it (friend of a friend of my sister's boyfriend). Haggis, I have to dipute "many", at least based on my own experience. Maybe the phenomenon is localized, or worse in certain segments of industry?

"Many" is a relative term; clearly you and Matt have more exposure to US reservists than I do.  But living in a border community I have heard this anecdote several times in the recent past from serving and former USAR and USARNG members.  It could be localized and I hope it is.

 

[Hunter]

I'm curious - what are everyone's ideas on what would make a sensible piece of legislation?  If you were asked to give input to the steering committee for the (hypothetical) Reserve Employment Protection Act, what would you your ideas be?

I would like to see an act that guarantees the jobs of Reservists who volunteer for overseas duty, from the beginning of work-up training to the return to the civillian world.  I don't think it would be reasonable to guarantee time off a job security for those going on course or on exercises, I think that should be left up to the individual and the employer. 

As far as jurisdiction, I think it could be passed as federal lagislation and then it would be up to the provincial governments to opt out.

What are people's thoughts on this?

 

[Sapper41]

Ghost,

First of all I don't think Class B commandos should even exist, Class B back fills are a crutch for both the army and the member.  Hopefully in the near future we can move back and forth between reg and reserve with minimal restrictions.  Unless you have a plan, shake the class B thing and get a life you'll be better for it in the long term.  Sorry if that sounds harsh, but class B junkies need to wake up and smell their future ie no job security, no pension (is it 2007 yet?)  Maybe Alberta is different but my unit members are very well motivated to achieve civilian career success and are more interested in courses and overseas tours than long term class B contracts.  Those that want to serve full time join full time and are doing quite well.

As for ordering whole units for gate guard, wow that sounds fun!  Don't sell the abilities of reservists so short.  I am in favor of job protection for reservists for courses and deployments on a volunteer basis only.  I work for a city and it took about a month to get leave for Afghanistan.  It's hard not to rock the boat at work and it has been mentioned that I need to sort out my priorities.  So I would welcome more support but doubt that small companies would want to hire a reservist knowing they could leave whenever they felt like it.

All you junkies can fire at will.  :warstory:

 

[TCBF]

There are Canadian reservists who don't want their current employers - usually 'citizens of convenience' whose loyalty is NOT to Canada - to even know they are IN the military.

Even after WW2, there were Cdn servicemen who had their jobs 'stolen' and nothing was done about it.