Retro Pay & Allow 1Apr 2014 - 1Apr 2017

[McG]

From iAsk:

This question comes from Chief Warrant Officer Barry Legault at 1 Canadian Air Division. He asks: Is it possible to untie the cost of living increase for military members from the collective bargaining agreement for civilians?

Thanks for your question, Chief Warrant Officer Legault. Your response comes from Lieutenant-General Christine Whitecross, Chief Military Personnel:

Disengaging from the current compensation comparability construct between the Public Service and the CAF is worthy of note and may be considered by Director Pay, Policy and Development as part of a future review of military compensation.

It should be noted that this construct is a long-standing principle upon which the CAF compensation system is based. Following unification of the CAF in the mid-60s, the Department of National Defence and the Treasury Board Secretariat adopted the principle of comparability between the CAF and the PS.

There were two major reasons for instituting comparability - that CAF members would benefit from the results of collective bargaining and that the federal government acted as the employer for both groups.

Therefore, CAF economic increases are determined by Treasury Board with due consideration given to what it awards the Public Service through collective bargaining - and other means for non-unionized groups.

Should future reviews of military compensation result in changes to the current construct, they will be communicated broadly to the Defence Team.

 

[tdccanadian]

Any news lately?

 

[brihard]

From iAsk:

This question comes from Chief Warrant Officer Barry Legault at 1 Canadian Air Division. He asks: Is it possible to untie the cost of living increase for military members from the collective bargaining agreement for civilians?

Thanks for your question, Chief Warrant Officer Legault. Your response comes from Lieutenant-General Christine Whitecross, Chief Military Personnel:

Disengaging from the current compensation comparability construct between the Public Service and the CAF is worthy of note and may be considered by Director Pay, Policy and Development as part of a future review of military compensation.

It should be noted that this construct is a long-standing principle upon which the CAF compensation system is based. Following unification of the CAF in the mid-60s, the Department of National Defence and the Treasury Board Secretariat adopted the principle of comparability between the CAF and the PS.

There were two major reasons for instituting comparability - that CAF members would benefit from the results of collective bargaining and that the federal government acted as the employer for both groups.

Therefore, CAF economic increases are determined by Treasury Board with due consideration given to what it awards the Public Service through collective bargaining - and other means for non-unionized groups.

Should future reviews of military compensation result in changes to the current construct, they will be communicated broadly to the Defence Team.

I think that's something we want to be careful of making noise against. Our public service is well compensated and has very good benefits. In the time our compensation has been linked to theirs, we have been one of the best compensated militaries in the world. By having a link to public ervice compensation, we benefit from their collective bargaining process- something we have no access to. Absent a construct that links our compensation with the public service, we could very easily be hung out to dry and ignored. Our system of pay and benefits obviously isn't perfect, but it's pretty good. I don't think it's broke. Do we want to open that pandora's box?

 

[blacktriangle]

I think that's something we want to be careful of making noise against. Our public service is well compensated and has very good benefits. In the time our compensation has been linked to theirs, we have been one of the best compensated militaries in the world. By having a link to public ervice compensation, we benefit from their collective bargaining process- something we have no access to. Absent a construct that links our compensation with the public service, we could very easily be hung out to dry and ignored. Our system of pay and benefits obviously isn't perfect, but it's pretty good. I don't think it's broke. Do we want to open that pandora's box?

Exactly. This.

(Thank you for writing this so I didn't have to - and wording it much nicer than I probably could have)

 

[ModlrMike]

We just spent $30bn and counting of money we don't have. What makes anyone think there's a pay raise coming?  >

 

[MilEME09]

We just spent $30bn and counting of money we don't have. What makes anyone think there's a pay raise coming?  >

because politicians will give them selves a pat on the back raise, so the public sector union in their next contract talks will demand one too, and aren't we tied to their raises?

 

[NavyShooter]

I'm not holding my breath...heck, they haven't even found my back-pay for my missing SDA/Refit audit yet.

I'm steeling myself for a pay freeze in fact.  Welcome back to Liberal Governments...

 

[CountDC]

10 years...........but I only have 5 at most this time.  [

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I'm steeling myself for a pay freeze in fact.  Welcome back to Liberal Governments...

I am sure lots of people serving will respond with a lack of GAFF towards their job, in return.

 

[Aurora]

I see in the following site http://psacunion.ca/new-collective-agreement-cra-signed, that PSAC has signed an agreement with CRA, and also http://psacunion.ca/we-have-agreement-cra-0, shows what they bargained for.

Does this mean the CAF will finally move forward on a pay raise and back pay?

 

[dapaterson]

I see in the following site http://psacunion.ca/new-collective-agreement-cra-signed, that PSAC has signed an agreement with CRA, and also http://psacunion.ca/we-have-agreement-cra-0, shows what they bargained for.

Does this mean the CAF will finally move forward on a pay raise and back pay?

No. CRA was long overdue - this is the settlement that removed severance pay for voluntary termination, as was done for most PSAC unions several years ago.

 

[Aurora]

The second website mentions wage increases, and that they had to be made prior to the Severance buy-outs.

Or am I reading it wrong?

 

[CountDC]

doesn't matter.  As mentioned prior CRA has nothing to do with us. 

 

[Occam]

CRA was even longer without a contract than everyone else in the PS.  The most recent contract takes them back to 2012 for wage increases and covers increases up to Nov 1 2015 - whereas most of the PS have contracts that expired in August 2014.  Because of this, they negotiated a "re-opener" clause that will allow them to re-open the negotiations for raises for 2014 and 2015, presumably based on what the rest of the PS gets when we all settle.

CRA is but a drop in the bucket of the overall PS.  Their raises will eventually factor in when there are a sufficient number of unions who have settled to establish a benchmark raise that would be used to calculate the CF raise.

 

[CountDC]

it appears that CRA is such a small drop in the bucket that it doesn't actually have an impact on us as even though they didn't have a contract in place we received pay adjustments based on what the rest of the PS had.

Little bit of interesting reading on our pay calculations here  http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/caf-community-pay/pay-overview.page

Noted that it doesn't explain the difference between reg f and reserve and I find it interesting that the difference between my PS counterpart is 13.5% while my P Res counterpart is 15%. Hopefully I am missing something there.

 

[kratz]

When the PRes rates increased to 85% of Reg F (from 75%) back in 1998, I was informed the 15% difference was because the PRes did not pay into the pension or the SDB. In 2007, when PRes started paying into the pension, some people started asking if we would see that 13% pay increase? Nothing has come from it yet. So essentially, PRes members have seen a 13% reduction in pay for the past 9 years.

 

[dapaterson]

it appears that CRA is such a small drop in the bucket that it doesn't actually have an impact on us as even though they didn't have a contract in place we received pay adjustments based on what the rest of the PS had.

Little bit of interesting reading on our pay calculations here  http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/caf-community-pay/pay-overview.page

Noted that it doesn't explain the difference between reg f and reserve and I find it interesting that the difference between my PS counterpart is 13.5% while my P Res counterpart is 15%. Hopefully I am missing something there.

Define "PS counterpart"; there's a wide array of PS classifications out there...

 

[CountDC]

looking at the link you don't need to have a specific counterpart for the percentage - it gives the percentages applicable to all in regards to the military factor - 7.5% and 6% for a total of 13.5%.

 

[dapaterson]

When the PRes rates increased to 85% of Reg F (from 75%) back in 1998, I was informed the 15% difference was because the PRes did not pay into the pension or the SDB. In 2007, when PRes started paying into the pension, some people started asking if we would see that 13% pay increase? Nothing has come from it yet. So essentially, PRes members have seen a 13% reduction in pay for the past 9 years.

Do not confuse anecdote with fact.  There are many myths circulating about P Res compensation and benefits. P Res pay scales were largely benchmarked at the journeyman level for a subset of Reg F occupations, with adjustments made for posting turbulence and other factors.

I've never quite understood the philosophy "I want all the benefits of full-time military service, but none of the disadvantages" that seems to permeate so many full-time Reservists.

 

[Remius]

Do not confuse anecdote with fact.  There are many myths circulating about P Res compensation and benefits. P Res pay scales were largely benchmarked at the journeyman level for a subset of Reg F occupations, with adjustments made for posting turbulence and other factors.

I've never quite understood the philosophy "I want all the benefits of full-time military service, but none of the disadvantages" that seems to permeate so many full-time Reservists.

Except that none of that is written anywhere, those benchmarks you are mentioning are just as anecdotal.  Unless you have a reference for that (please say you do because I've always wanted that reference).

I've also never understood the philosophy that equal work does not equate to equal pay that permeates so many regular force members.