• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Sea Pay Navy - Needs to be changed

Sub_Guy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
460
Why is it that sailors are so whiney?

The thought of Army guys working in field units earning full time field pay (identical to Aircrew Pay or Sea Pay) has some sailors all bent out of shape.  Some feel they have to justify their sea pay to their Army brothers who question them.  This is complete nonsense, we all want more money, but lets be reasonable.

Sea Pay is nice, but sailors do not earn it while sitting alongside, they are given it.  If you are working hard alongside then you are doing your job besides most of the jobs alongside are "joe" jobs, cleaning, painting, re-organizing, then re-organizing again, and training (Wednesday's) there are some positions in dockyard that will have you working a hell of a lot harder than those on the ship. .  They don't get sea pay, because they DON'T go to sea, PLUS they have to bring their own lunch!  I have heard duty watch rumblings, please....  A duty watch on ship does mess with your schedule but you are given lunch, supper, and breakfast, and not to mention that the next day you are usually gone by lunch time (depends on the department, so put down the Kleenex).  Having stood duty watches on the Victoria, I know how difficult they are... Lets see, we have the TV in the control room, you do rounds, you monitor various systems, and you play XBOX for the 8 hours you are off.  Doesn't that sound rough?  The only thing crappy about duty watch is sitting on the brow on the mids, but that alone doesn't justify full sea pay.

As a former sailor and submariner I know that sea pay is a joke, I know I shouldn't get it while on a 5 month long course, and if anyone else thinks they deserve it, they are just being greedy. I have stood duty watches on the surface and the submarine (sub duty watches are the cats ass, did 1 in 4 during a month long work period on the Victoria and I loved it.)

I certainly hope those Army guys who are sitting there watching fat a$$ sailors on course collecting sea pay get their full time field pay get their allowance backdated to Apr 07.

Perhaps the way the Navy administers sea pay needs to be adjusted.  (ie. Immediately ceases when you are unfit, Immediately ceases when you go on course, Immediately ceases when you fail an expres test)
 

Ex-Dragoon

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1
Points
430
And why do you want to destroy a perk.... ::)

Show me where a sailor complained about the the guys in green getting FOA full time?
 

PO2FinClk

Full Member
Reaction score
-1
Points
210
Ex-Dragoon said:
Show me where a sailor complained about the the guys in green getting FOA full time?
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/63421.15.html Post by Navy_Blue

Dolphin_Hunter, the Navy (or CMS) do not control any envriomental allowance, nor do any of the ECS's. Their establishement was negotiated between DND & TB to compensate for additional hardships encountered in the work environement. CBI's establish who is eligible to receive it where it reads "an officer or non-commissioned member posted to a ship, other than a submarine, or serving in a sea-going position". If you desire to have people lose their SDA while on course and such you then end up having to be posted off the ship, or folks would simply do everything in their power to not go away on any course.

I fail to see any logical or plausible alternative in your post, unfortunately I see it as but a rant. I however do whole heartedly agree with you that Field Unit's should be in recipt of full time FOA. I have wondered for decades now why they were not in receipt of it deserve in full.
 

George Wallace

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
4
Points
430
Ex-Dragoon said:
And why do you want to destroy a perk.... ::)

Show me where a sailor complained about the the guys in green getting FOA full time?

I haven't seen that, nor have I seen a Sailor stand up for it either.  Guys in Green pull off 24 hr Duty, as you say in the Navy - "watches" and they get no special pay for it, so why should a Sailor alongside in Halifax or Esquimalt?  Three meals seems a given, but extra pay for doing a Duty...... come on.  Even worse, why extra Sea Pay if you aren't at sea?  If it is good to give a Sailor those benefits, then why not the Field Unit Soldier?  Either pay both, or neither.
 

Ex-Dragoon

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1
Points
430
I have no problems with the guys in green getting full time FOA equal to what we get as sea pay...only a dumb sailor would feel otherwise.

PO2finclk....reply#57
 

George Wallace

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
4
Points
430
Ex-Dragoon said:
....reply#57

OK......Someone broke these off and now this is reply #5.....................no wonder it is not making the sense it did when I first posted. 
 

Ex-Dragoon

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1
Points
430
George...this is a new topic started by dolphin hunter...what myself and PO2FinClk are referring too is :http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/63421.45.html
 

PO2FinClk

Full Member
Reaction score
-1
Points
210
Ex-Dragoon said:
PO2finclk....reply#57
Actually was referring to Reply #22:
[quote author=Navy_Blue]Oh and please tell me your not going to get field pay full time on Canadian soil???  I can Justify my Sea pay while on ship full time.  Some one rationalize field pay full time for me.[/quote]
 

Ex-Dragoon

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1
Points
430
PO2FinClk said:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/63421.15.html Post by Navy_Blue

Dolphin_Hunter, the Navy (or CMS) do not control any envriomental allowance, nor do any of the ECS's. Their establishement was negotiated between DND & TB to compensate for additional hardships encountered in the work environement. CBI's establish who is eligible to receive it where it reads "an officer or non-commissioned member posted to a ship, other than a submarine, or serving in a sea-going position". If you desire to have people lose their SDA while on course and such you then end up having to be posted off the ship, or folks would simply do everything in their power to not go away on any course.

I fail to see any logical or plausible alternative in your post, unfortunately I see it as but a rant. I however do whole heartedly agree with you that Field Unit's should be in recipt of full time FOA. I have wondered for decades now why they were not in receipt of it deserve in full.

Well looking at his profile he has an obvious hate on for the Navy so take his comments with a grain of salt.

PO2FinClk also look at 57.
 

PO2FinClk

Full Member
Reaction score
-1
Points
210
I took a second look Ex-Dragoon, and I am getting the feeling he is not necessarily upset with the SDA construct, but rather with the SUBA eligibility:

[quote author=CBI 205.37]
3. (Limitations) An officer or non-commissioned member is not entitled to Submarine Allowance when the member is:
a. in receipt of Sea Duty Allowance under CBI 205.35;
b. a trainee undergoing the initial shore phase of submarine training; or
c. in receipt of Joint Task Force 2 Allowance under CBI 205.385. [/quote]
As he is undergoing sub qual and no longer posted to a surface ship he is losing  both SDA & SUBA. He should therefore look to have the SUBA eligibility amended to become eligible while training.

However although not entitled to full time SUBA he is entitled to Casual SUBA (CBI 205.375) while doing his duty watches on a submarine. That being said he would be in receipt of allowances while undergoing training disqualying his statement that he is not being compensated while on a submarine.

Taking a few minutes to look up the definitions could have cleared up any misunderstanding of entitlements.
 

NCS_Eng

New Member
Reaction score
0
Points
110
So one naval pers (on this board) has some reservations about giving Field Allowance full time and suddenly we are all whiners?

Please. It seems you may have an axe to grind in regard to the Navy but don't paint us all with such a broad brush. I've always thought that our Army colleagues should get the same treatment in regards to allowances as us and I'm glad it finally came through. As for the allowance itself I always looked at it as a nice perk, and while I no longer receive it (I'm posted to a desk) my QOL is a hell of a lot higher now than when I was in the fleet, so I think it balances out. And I've always seen that as the point.

Anecdotally, I run a section that is pretty purple (we've got Army, Navy and Air Force Personnel) and this was universally seen as a good thing.
 

Greymatters

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Im not Navy but as I understand it from Navy guys I worked with, Sea Pay was jusitifed for the following things.

1) While out of port, you were under the Captains thumb the whole trip, which was a high stress factor.
2) Disobeying orders at sea was not a minor disobediance, it could be classified as mutiny and carry a much higher penalty. 
2) Even if you wanted to try to 'sneak out', youre surrounded by water so there was no where to go.
2) Even if off duty, you could be called back to full duty through any conceivable act, be it rescue of another vessel to action stations.
3) Even when in dock, you could be called back to duty within an hours notice and be back at sea, so could not leave the area. 

Apparently that was the original intent of compensation, and over time it got expanded to include all sort of other unique situations by senior navy staff who wanted to keep the pay and benefits wherever possible. 

In that light I see its not much different than field pay for troops (other than the mutiny potential and it was a bit easier for us Army guys to sneak away when we wanted to for some 'recreation'...)
 

kratz

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
122
Points
880
During a Halifax PLQ last year, one of the courses was briefed by the Fleet Chief (or Formation Chief) that discussions were underway to amend SDA for those who always lineup to get landed prior to deployment. This same briefing also mentioned possible changes for full-time FOA for soldiers. While this is second hand information, and it is only at the discussion levels, it does recognize  those higher up are interested in addressing the issues mentioned here.
 
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Does anyone remember the days when you would leave the Garrison in Shilo at 0615hrs and leave the guns out in the training area with a guard on them and you would return to the Garrison around 2300hrs and get told to be back at 0530hrs for a 0615 departure?  They would do this for a 4 day stint and then bring the guns back in to camp.  This avoided the guns paying out the field pay to the whole battery and only to the guards left behind.

Some call it making your FOA go further others like me called it cheap.  I wonder where (if it comes) the new allowance will come from, will the centre pay it or will it come out of the unit budget?

Bean counting, at one time it was the only war we had..... :salute:
 

Greymatters

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Thats not bean-counting, that's a commander finding and exploiting a loophole in the field pay system... at the same time exploiting the troops!  Honest pay for honest work isnt a principal that commanders should ignore.

 

George Wallace

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
4
Points
430
Sorry, but that was Bean Counting......and we can see the results everywhere in the Army today.  Going to the Range once a year for PWT.  Less time in the Field.  This is all Bean Counting and affecting the effectiveness of the Army.  Every Unit has to put forward a Training Plan and Budget for their next Training Year.  They only have so much funds, so they must make the decisions as to what Trg is most important.  Bullets are expensive.  FOA is expensive.  Long Road Moves are expensive.  Posting personnel In or Out is expensive.  Sending pers off on Course is expensive.  TD is expensive.  When they don't have a well prepared Training Plan and justifiable Budget, then everything will suffer.  It does come down the the Unit's "Business Plan" as to how FOA, and all other fiscal planning that the unit is required to do, will be administered.

There are very few Units in the CF that have money coming out of their ears 'carte blanche'.  (We won't mention them here...  ;D)
 

Greymatters

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
True enough, but I tend to draw a more definate line between operational needs (commanders prioritizing expenses and saving money based on an allotted budget) and true 'bean-counting' (treasury and finance staff telling units to do more with less). 

I guess you can call it all bean-counting (and you have) but I see quite a difference between those who have been allotted limited money for x number of training days (by the bean counters), and commanders who squeeze in training days that were never allotted for in the budget in the first place.  In the end, the commander asked in his budget for x number of training days, was told 'NO', and then is going ahead and doing it anyway. 

While the need for training is valuable and should be prioritized as such, especially prior to deploying troops overseas, it defeats the purpose of the regulations regarding field pay, and raises questions of ethical behaviour on the part of commanders.  Those regulations were put in place so that soldiers were compensated for their extra work in the field, not so they could be sent home for 4 hours sleep on an endless basis. 
 

eerickso

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
60
On base, you can expect to stand duty watch once every 4 months. On ship, it is 2-3 times every month. This is how I justified sea pay. However, when at sea, I sometimes feel I should be paying the navy.
 
Top