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

Canadian Federal Budget 2014 (11 Feb 2014)

GrimRX said:
Anyone else get that email telling us to shut our gobs about the budget if approached by the press? lol

Oops! Too late.  :facepalm:

Well as a private citizen we have the right to an opinion. Expressing that opinion in uniform is another matter completely. :-X

 
GAP said:
Quote from: Halifax Tar on Today at 05:28:26
You do realize how many women work at Air Canada, don't you?......think about it.... ;D

Yes but the last time I flew Air Canada it appeared they were all quickly approaching CRA.  Air Canada has been shedding people for years so it's only those with enough seniority that could stick around. 
 
I would have thought SAR would be treated differently. Expect the usual tight budget dump on the three services but SAR has a high public profile and needs some new planes if it is stay clear of a rescue mission comprised due to the wrong aircraft or no aircraft.
Then again there is this bureaucratic mumbo jumbo :
Government of Canada releases draft RFP for Fixed-Wing Search and Rescue Aircraft Replacement Project
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?mthd=tp&crtr.page=1&nid=768259&crtr.tp1D=1

LINK REMOVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SITE POLICY
 
But there's no chance in hell they're delivering any sort of planes for FWSAR this year. Your draft RFP is as close as you'll get, I bet.
 
George Wallace said:
If any of you have been watching the news, it was announced that the Federal Public Service Health Care Plan is more than doubling its costs to retired members; from $261 to $550.  The point that this is the Public Service Health Care Plan is letting the fact that it is also the plan that members of the CAF and RCMP use, and many retain after retiring, has slipped by seemingly unnoticed by anyone as of yet.  Even with indexing, that is a large chunk of cash removed from one's pension, more that that covered by indexing.  Once again, the Government has screwed over the Veteran.
The press is looking at this now:
Retired soldiers, Mounties hit by Conservative budget changes
Budget 2014 finds savings in cutting contribution to health plan for retired public servants

James Cudmore, CBC News
13 February 2014

Retired soldiers and Mounties, along with wounded veterans and their families, are among a group of former federal employees that the government targeted for savings in its budget Tuesday.

In its economic plan, the government announced it was going after $7.5 billion in savings by forcing participants in the government’s health plan for public servants to pay half of the costs, up from 25 per cent. Before 2006, it was even lower.

The changes have been criticized by retired public servants who have called on the government to honour its commitments to the program made in previous contract negotiations.

The government’s budget document indicated the changes would affect “retired federal employees,” but it did not specify that soldiers, Mounties and some veterans wounded in Afghanistan would also be affected.

“I’m very disappointed in this move,” said Gordon Moore, Dominion president of the Royal Canadian Legion.

“These men and women put their life on the line. These young men and women who served 30, 35, or 40 years in the Canadian Forces or the RCMP, they made a commitment, and the government made a commitment at that time that they would look after them for life.

“And now the government of the day is turning its back on these veterans of both the Canadian Forces and the RCMP.”

But Tuesday, the government described the changes as “modest” and low cost for those affected.

“For a government employee opting for individual coverage in his/her retirement, a move to equal cost sharing would increase his/her annual payments to the plan from $261 to roughly $550.

"This increase, when fully implemented, would represent less than one per cent of a gross federal public service pension of $30,000,” the budget said.

But it's likely those changes are actually worth hundreds of dollars more because many former public servants, soldiers and Mounties opt for benefits for their families. That family coverage is more expensive.

Moore said the Legion wrote to Treasury Board president Tony Clement in November to discuss rumours of the benefit changes.

“Unfortunately, we did not get a response back,” Moore said. 

The letter suggested the government is breaking a promise it made to the former federal employees, who held up their end of the bargain.

“Future retirees are going to end up paying 50 per cent of their total health cost, which is not the commitment the government made to them when they joined the Forces or the RCMP,” Moore said.

“As they get into their retirement years, what I am worried about is … are they going to have to take that out of their income? Because you know they have rent and all sorts of other expenses that they might have to choose as a priority over their own health.”

Indeed, the budget document itself anticipated such criticism and included a quote from the C.D. Howe Institute attacking the provision of such paid benefits.

“There is no case for taxpayers to cover 75 per cent of the cost of the Public Service Health Care Plan, especially when such benefits are rare and becoming rarer in the private sector.”

Clement said Wednesday that the government would act to protect low-income retirees from being negatively impacted by the government’s move. But Clement maintained the 100 per cent cost increase for retired soldiers, Mounties, public servants and some veterans is fair.

“I believe I've been fair and reasonable in my approach to this while at the same time maintaining the integrity of a voluntary program that offers very generous supplemental benefits over and above what these retirees have available to them as by virtue of provincial health-care plans or other programs like the Veterans Affairs program,” he said.

Clement said the final details of the government’s proposed changes would be hammered out with the public service unions at the bargaining table.

“So far as I’m concerned, even though we have directed our attention in the budget to this issue, there is still time for the union to discuss the modalities of any changes with me. I want to be fair and reasonable, make sure that we protect low-income seniors, have a transition period so that this does not wallop people all at once. I don’t want to see that happen, as well.”

Some retired soldiers and Mounties belong to the National Association of Federal Retirees, an organization that Clement’s office said will be consulted in the talks.

But Moore said the veterans affected by these changes need their own representation.

“The Royal Canadian Legion would be more than grateful to be invited to the table so we can discuss these issues,” he said.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/retired-soldiers-mounties-hit-by-conservative-budget-changes-1.2535875

... and there may be a legal challenge:
Retiree group considers legal response to changes to health care plan
Kathryn May, OTTAWA CITIZEN
13 February 2014

OTTAWA — Federal unions and retirees haven’t broken off talks with the Conservative government over changes to the Public Service Health Care Plan, but they are consulting lawyers about legal options to challenge them.

Treasury Board President Tony Clement says he’s still open to negotiating changes to the plan but the government’s decision to book $7.4 billion in savings over the next six years in this week’s federal budget from those adjustments suggests there’s little room for compromise.

The government is taking aim at retired public servants to help reduce the cost of the health-care plan, for which taxpayers are on the hook for nearly $20 billion in future costs. It intends to double the premiums that retired bureaucrats pay for the plan while limiting their eligibility.

The budget’s changes have been at the heart of a behind-the-scenes stalemate between the government and the committee of union, management and retiree representatives that oversee the plan. The changes don’t affect working public servants but the 17 public service unions have backed the retirees from the start.

The health plan is negotiated by the joint union-management National Joint Council.

Gary Oberg, president of the National Association of Federal Retirees — known as FSNA — said his association is prepared to negotiate, but is also “reviewing all of its options and determining a go-forward strategy,” including a possible legal challenge.

“We’re asking the government to shelve any plans that are detrimental to the retirement and health-care security of any Canadian, including public servants. Our federal government should take up the role of leader and champion for retirement security.”

Oberg questions whether the government can change the rules of retirement benefits promised to employees while working. The courts have dealt with this issue in several cases, including one involving Weyerhaeuser Company Ltd. and General Motors of Canada where courts ruled that the companies were bound to continue health-care benefits during retirement.

Clement, who has called the plan a “super-duper” and “Cadillac” plan, wouldn’t comment on negotiations.

“The changes highlighted in the budget are fair and reasonable changes to a voluntary, supplemental health-care plan,” said Heather Domereckyj, a spokesperson for Clement.

“The cost-sharing ratio of this plan has changed many times since its introduction and changes are still subject to negotiations. Provisions for low-income retirees will be addressed at the bargaining table. Even with equal cost-sharing, this extremely generous plan will remain affordable.”

The FSNA has been ramping up what began as a low-key national campaign last summer to drum up the support of the nearly 200,000 former public servants, military and RCMP members who belong to the associations. They have tabled petitions and swamped MPs and Clement with letters opposing the move.

The health care plan provides supplementary health care to all public servants and retirees. It reimburses the 600,000 members for a range of goods and services that are not covered by provincial and territorial health care plans. Retirees account for half of all members.

The government intends to make public servants pick up 50 per cent of the cost of the contributions for the plan rather than the 25 per cent they pay now. With the new cost-sharing, the government estimates a single retiree’s contributions for basic coverage would double from $261 to $550 a year.

But FSNA expects the doubling of premiums will affect all three levels of coverage, for individuals, families or survivors. This means, for example, a family buying the top coverage — level three — would see premiums double from $1,058 to $2,116 a year.

The government is also changing the eligibility for the plan. Under the existing rules, retirees who worked for two years in the public service can join the plan. The government argues two years is too short a time to access the plan and is extending that to six years.

It’s unlikely the government is going to budge on its decision to make retirees pay half of the premiums. It has, however, said it was open to protecting low-income pensioners from premium increases. FSNA said the average pension among men is $27,000 and $21,000 among women.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/entertainment/Retiree+group+considers+legal+response+changes+health+care/9506170/story.html
 
Back
Top