Allowances - Post Living Differential (PLD) [MERGED]

[Eye In The Sky]

This was really hard to do on my phone.

View attachment 76989

Thanks for taking the time and effort!



* on second thought - make it 6 days short leave. Same signatures etc.

 

[Quirky]

Ok, flip side, if a tech is coming in 7 years at Cold Lake and sees that loss of CFHD staring them in the face, is it easy to get posted elsewhere?

Don’t know what the CMs do these days, but I know techs approaching 12 years now and they weren’t made any promises for postings.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Any Major will make at least significantly, and usually vastly more than any Cpl, CFHD and income offsets notwithstanding. Housing assistance isn’t a ‘gimme’, it’s a policy to protect recruiting and retention by protecting a member’s ability to have a basic, decent standard of living regardless of where CAF sends them. A brand new Maj makes $122k. They can afford to live on the economy, in any market, within their means so long as they make responsible decisions. A junior troop, without CFHD, in some places cannot, no matter how financially responsible they are. This policy corrects that.

I can speak from firsthand experience in an expensive market with income equivalent to a Maj. I neither need nor deserve taxpayer subsidy beyond my normal income, and neither do my economic equivalents in CAF. The situation is very different for the sigs Pte posted to Leitrim, the clerk Cpl sent to Esquimault, or the new sailor in Halifax. Canada needs to recruit and keep these people, especially those with difficult to replace technical skills. Housing costs and posting could force them out. It’s much less likely to do that to the Major who’s making $122-137k.

Well not with an atitude like that you don't

Does anyone find it ironic that the new policy designed to help with "cost of living" does the most damage to members living in areas with the highest cost of living?

I actually think it's hilarious....

 

[zoomie36]

wished i didnt scrimp and save so much to pay off my mortgage earlier this year. That decision is costing me $450 a month

 

[Furniture]

Well not with an atitude like that you don't

Does anyone find it ironic that the new policy designed to help with "cost of living" does the most damage to members living in areas with the highest cost of living?

I actually think it's hilarious....

It is about the most CAF thing the CAF could possibly do.

Actually, the most CAF thing will be to claw back the CAFHD from the mid-December pay without notice, because TBS tells them the 7 years started from when the member arrived at their current location...

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

wished i didnt scrimp and save so much to pay off my mortgage earlier this year. That decision is costing me $450 a month

Bro, you're doing it wrong!

Gotta keep the debt money printer going a little longer!

 

[zoomie36]

Bro, you're doing it wrong!

Gotta keep the debt money printer going a little longer!

Hmmm 2nd mortgage time for reno’s. Might work??

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Hmmm 2nd mortgage time for reno’s. Might work??

Remortgage the entire house, take out a massive HELOC and put it all in Bitcoin!

Use that $450 a month for interest payments!

 

[zoomie36]

Remortgage the entire house, take out a massive HELOC and put it all in Bitcoin!

Use that $450 a month for interest payments!

done!!

 

[brihard]

Well not with an atitude like that you don't

Does anyone find it ironic that the new policy designed to help with "cost of living" does the most damage to members living in areas with the highest cost of living?

I actually think it's hilarious....

I think they’ve gotten closer to helping members that need help rather than simply handing out cash out of largesse, but without means testing. I think it would have been more honest to hammer out the salary increases first, and then move from PLD-CFHD so that the one set of new numbers wouldn’t obfuscate the other. That, though, is of course exactly why they didn’t.

In a few of the highest cost areas in BC, even some of the highest paid NCOs and some Capt/Maj (or floaty equivalent) will still see some CFHD.

In effect, CFHD has sort of out a regional ‘hard floor’ on a member’s combined base pay and CFHD. It has served to compress the pay scale upwards from the bottom somewhat.

If the loss of PLD for much more highly paid officers and seniormost NCMs proves to have an operationally significant impact on recruiting or, more likely, retention, then CAF and TBS can always revisit it. I don’t think that’s where the crisis is though, at least not if discussions around HQ and senior appointment blot are to be believed. Most every discussion about operationally significant retention problems seems to be focusing on technically skilled NCMs and NCOs. I’m perfectly willing to be shown to be wrong, of course.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I

wished i didnt scrimp and save so much to pay off my mortgage earlier this year. That decision is costing me $450 a month

I actually heard someone at work muse about slowing down on the mortgage, just to hold on to CFHD…

 

[zoomie36]

I

I actually heard someone at work muse about slowing down on the mortgage, just to hold on to CFHD…

Makes total financial sense. I have no complaints on my wage, just wishing the PLD change would happen later, totally selfish reasons

 

[Furniture]

I think they’ve gotten closer to helping members that need help rather than simply handing out cash out of largesse, but without means testing. I think it would have been more honest to hammer out the salary increases first, and then move from PLD-CFHD so that the one set of new numbers wouldn’t obfuscate the other. That, though, is of course exactly why they didn’t.

In a few of the highest cost areas in BC, even some of the highest paid NCOs and some Capt/Maj (or floaty equivalent) will still see some CFHD.

In effect, CFHD has sort of out a regional ‘hard floor’ on a member’s combined base pay and CFHD. It has served to compress the pay scale upwards from the bottom somewhat.

If the loss of PLD for much more highly paid officers and seniormost NCMs proves to have an operationally significant impact on recruiting or, more likely, retention, then CAF and TBS can always revisit it. I don’t think that’s where the crisis is though, at least not if discussions around HQ and senior appointment blot are to be believed. Most every discussion about operationally significant retention problems seems to be focusing on technically skilled NCMs and NCOs. I’m perfectly willing to be shown to be wrong, of course.

You're really glossing over the part where people are ordered to move around somewhat regularly. Moves that will have a large impact on people's lifestyle. Why would I want to take a posting, or promotion that is guaranteed to force me to make do with less?

I have gone through it once already, and will not do it again. I'm 100% confident I'm not the only person in that position either.

 

[SupersonicMax]

You're really glossing over the part where people are ordered to move around somewhat regularly. Moves that will have a large impact on people's lifestyle. Why would I want to take a posting, or promotion that is guaranteed to force me to make do with less?

I have gone through it once already, and will not do it again. I'm 100% confident I'm not the only person in that position either.

That change in lifestyle happens at virtually every posting even now. Try moving Saskatchewan (No PLD) to Quebec (No PLD). The varying taxes in every province directly affects your purchasing power.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

That change in lifestyle happens at virtually every posting even now. Try moving Saskatchewan (No PLD) to Quebec (No PLD). The varying taxes in every province directly affects your purchasing power.

A “federal tax rate” for fed govt employees would ease the disparity some…govt employees all paying the same income tax etc regardless of province or territory they are moved to.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I think they’ve gotten closer to helping members that need help rather than simply handing out cash out of largesse, but without means testing. I think it would have been more honest to hammer out the salary increases first, and then move from PLD-CFHD so that the one set of new numbers wouldn’t obfuscate the other. That, though, is of course exactly why they didn’t.

In a few of the highest cost areas in BC, even some of the highest paid NCOs and some Capt/Maj (or floaty equivalent) will still see some CFHD.

In effect, CFHD has sort of out a regional ‘hard floor’ on a member’s combined base pay and CFHD. It has served to compress the pay scale upwards from the bottom somewhat.

If the loss of PLD for much more highly paid officers and seniormost NCMs proves to have an operationally significant impact on recruiting or, more likely, retention, then CAF and TBS can always revisit it. I don’t think that’s where the crisis is though, at least not if discussions around HQ and senior appointment blot are to be believed. Most every discussion about operationally significant retention problems seems to be focusing on technically skilled NCMs and NCOs. I’m perfectly willing to be shown to be wrong, of course.

Hand on heart hypothetical question here:

If your current Union negotiated with the Government and this is the deal they reached, would you be happy?

If this is what my old Union came up with after close to 15 years of not having PLD revisited, I'd ask for my $175.00 a month in dues back.

 

[Furniture]

That change in lifestyle happens at virtually every posting even now. Try moving Saskatchewan (No PLD) to Quebec (No PLD). The varying taxes in every province directly affects your purchasing power.

I don't need hypotheticals, I went from Victoria to Trenton just as Trenton was getting expensive, and accommodations in the the surrounding area were getting hard to find. I was already maxed for incentives as a Sgt, so I lost just over $1100 a month in allowances. The difference between SK and QC taxes isn't that high.

I'm glad the CAF made living more affordable for the Jr pers, but it has come at the cost of making thigs less appealing for the middle levels... Those middle levels who were supposed to not be "retreating into retirement" around this time last year.

 

[ballz]

There are a dumber of differentiating factors:
1. CAF members cannot negotiate pay And are legally prohibited from doing so.
2. CAF orders members to relocate to certain places, irrespective of local housing markets at origin or destination.
3. CAF does not pay overtime and makes it tough to hold a second job, limiting members’ ability to supplement their base income. Deployments cannot be counted on for this.
4. CAF relocations can make it difficult for members’ spouses to hold down good jobs or achieve career growth (though less so for the navy).
5. A Cpl in Ottawa or Esquimault makes the same salary as a Cpl in Greenwood or Shilo. In some places, junior soldiers cannot afford reasonable housing on base pay.
6. CAF has gotten more and more out of providing subsidized housing directly to troops.
7. CAF equips members will skills and experiences that sets the better members up for finding other careers elsewhere.

I haven't been a civilian so long I forgot any of that, I don't see how that supports - in any way at all - that a Corporal in Vancouver who already owns a house (or perhaps a Private that lives with their parents) should be compensated $2,000 less than his peer who might even be in the same section. I am guessing they just wrote those situations off as "few and far between" so the overall occurrences would be negligible since it takes most 25-30 years to pay off a home (or, in Vancouver, 25-30 years to save enough money for a down payment).

It seems to be like this has been used to treat (maybe with a bandaid) some other gripes, such as flattening some pay disparities i.e. LCols/Majors who do nothing but turn rations into poop get paid twice a much as the best Corporal in the Army. And encouraging people to not geo-lock themselves.

Conversely, if CAF fails to recruit and retain, that comes at the immediate expense of Canada’s ability to generate combat capable forces to defend the national interest and to contribute to coalition forces. Therefore, the recruiting and, more importantly, retention of trained troops for CAF is a national security imperative. If the inability of junior troops to afford a decent quality of housing in some markets is enough of a dissatisfier to hurt retention, then CAF (and Treasury Board) can either ignore it and eat the loss, or can have something in place to mitigate it. They’ve chosen the latter.

You're responding to me in ways that don't address the point at all.

CFHD as newly constructed seems reasonable (although the 7 years thing is an issue), though for some the transition from PLD to CFHD will suck.

Where did I say it wasn't?

Still, the overall notion of helping to offset higher costs of living, on a regional and means tested basis, is reasonable.

Except it's explicitly not to "offset higher costs of living," and won't at higher pay scales.

It's based on the premise of helping with "housing" which takes a tangent away from merit-based pay.

Like I said, I think part of the calculus is once you get to $120k/year you're already pot-committed and probably not going anywhere.

Giving the same housing allowance to a Major that you do to a Corporal is very hard to justify.

Is the problem housing or "the cost of living across regions" as you said earlier, which affect everybody?

Also the seven years thing is bonkers, but so is having to show you rent or pay a mortgage.

I think I could wrap my head around this more if they just didn't tie it to housing at all. Just called it the new PLD allowance and didn't tie to housing. I could agree that someone who makes $50k/year is disproportionately affected by the COL in a region moreso than someone making $120k and therefore warrants a better COL allowance. It's the other weird things that tie it so much to housing that throw me off - because that shouldn't matter.

 

[SupersonicMax]

I don't need hypotheticals, I went from Victoria to Trenton just as Trenton was getting expensive, and accommodations in the the surrounding area were getting hard to find. I was already maxed for incentives as a Sgt, so I lost just over $1100 a month in allowances. The difference between SK and QC taxes isn't that high.

I'm glad the CAF made living more affordable for the Jr pers, but it has come at the cost of making thigs less appealing for the middle levels... Those middle levels who were supposed to not be "retreating into retirement" around this time last year.

Hypothetical? People live this every year. SK to QC is a 5K net difference (ie: free of taxes) for 120k salary. That’s the equivalent of about $450 gross a month difference. I’d consider this significant.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I haven't been a civilian so long I forgot any of that, I don't see how that supports - in any way at all - that a Corporal in Vancouver who already owns a house (or perhaps a Private that lives with their parents) should be compensated $2,000 less than his peer who might even be in the same section. I am guessing they just wrote those situations off as "few and far between" so the overall occurrences would be negligible since it takes most 25-30 years to pay off a home (or, in Vancouver, 25-30 years to save enough money for a down payment).

It seems to be like this has been used to treat (maybe with a bandaid) some other gripes, such as flattening some pay disparities i.e. LCols/Majors who do nothing but turn rations into poop get paid twice a much as the best Corporal in the Army.

Omg you read my mind! Apparently you're evil if you think people should be paid more because of their rank.

I saw a few of these arguments made on SM the other day.

"I should be paid more than INSERT Rank X because I work hard and blah blah blah"

I felt like replying: "Well go get the quals/courses to become Rank X if you want to be paid more!"

I know, simple concept that is lost on some.

You're responding to me in ways that don't address the point at all.



Where did I say it wasn't?



Except it's explicitly not to "offset higher costs of living," and won't at higher pay scales.

It's based on the premise of helping with "housing" which takes a tangent away from merit-based pay.

Like I said, I think part of the calculus is once you get to $120k/year you're already pot-committed and probably not going anywhere.



Is the problem housing or "the cost of living across regions" as you said earlier, which affect everybody?

Also the seven years thing is bonkers, but so is having to show you rent or pay a mortgage.

I think I could wrap my head around this more if they just didn't tie it to housing at all. Just called it the new PLD allowance and didn't tie to housing. I could agree that someone who makes $50k/year is disproportionately affected by the COL in a region moreso than someone making $120k and therefore warrants a better COL allowance. It's the other weird things that tie it so much to housing that throw me off - because that shouldn't matter.

Agree with this. Honestly though, the entire policy seems half baked. A crappy attempt to try and solve a whole bunch of perceived problems while creating new ones in the process.

The CAF also came out of it with egg all over their faces, again.