CFB Cold Lake Thread- Merged

[reccecrewman]

As much as there should be PMQ housing at a decent semi-market rate, I totally disagree with the above statement. 
...and it's pretty self-explanatory I do believe.

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion.  My reasoning behind having PMQ rents on a scale based on rank is simple.  A young Corporal with 3 young kids (for example) is in a weaker financial position than the Warrant with 3 children.  As a VAC employee, I have seen my fair share of still serving soldiers come through the District Office doors looking for any type of financial aid that VAC can provide.  For the most part, they get sent packing as VAC isn't be a financial bailout for administrative burdens who can't keep their finances in order.  However, a huge majority of those I've seen come through our doors are in fact, young Privates and Corporals with young families. 

If the Forces had their PMQ's on a sliding scale based off rank, it would lessen financial hardship on the lower ranks.  Spare me the argument of "I've done 20 years and I've EARNED my right to be making more than a Private/Corporal" because I agree with you.  A Warrant HAS earned the right to better pay than the Private/Corporal, but that doesn't mean there isn't something that can be done to offset the disparity in rent paid to income earned between the ranks.  Take Government subsidized housing as the model that could be applied to PMQ's. Subsidized housing looks at the occupants income and a percentage is taken for rent.  What's the real difference between Government subsidized housing and PMQ's anyway?  Most Q's I've seen are nothing spectacular, and some are downright junk.  Quick builds designed to provide shelter to soldier's and their families. 

By doing this, the Forces would also be lowering the risk of young families going through financial hardship.  I know here in Ontario, hydro costs are ridiculous and heating bills in the winter are harsh as well.  A car payment, utilities, insurance and groceries to feed a young family can chew up the lower ranks pay very quickly.  The senior NCO's are the ones that end up having to deal with these financial burdens when their creditors are calling the Unit looking for money.  I can go on an on, but there's no point as people's viewpoints are what they are. 

Regards

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Subsidized housing looks at the occupants income and a percentage is taken for rent. 

Have you EVER been in a subsidized housing area??  Most occupants are there because it makes the beer, nice cars, and dope cheaper.  [but that's a whole 'nother thread]
To stick to your post, just where does the other percentage come from??........oh yea, from other folks taxes who then have less money to spend on their own housing.

Now I'm not saying it isn't hard for a young new CF member to hang tough in the first few years but after four years or so a decent enough wage to live on is provided.  Unlike a lot of civilian jobs that just dry up and disappear....

 

[Shamrock]

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion.  My reasoning behind having PMQ rents on a scale based on rank is simple.  A young Corporal with 3 young kids (for example) is in a weaker financial position than the Warrant with 3 children.  As a VAC employee, I have seen my fair share of still serving soldiers come through the District Office doors looking for any type of financial aid that VAC can provide.  For the most part, they get sent packing as VAC isn't be a financial bailout for administrative burdens who can't keep their finances in order.  However, a huge majority of those I've seen come through our doors are in fact, young Privates and Corporals with young families. 

If the Forces had their PMQ's on a sliding scale based off rank, it would lessen financial hardship on the lower ranks.  Spare me the argument of "I've done 20 years and I've EARNED my right to be making more than a Private/Corporal" because I agree with you.  A Warrant HAS earned the right to better pay than the Private/Corporal, but that doesn't mean there isn't something that can be done to offset the disparity in rent paid to income earned between the ranks.  Take Government subsidized housing as the model that could be applied to PMQ's. Subsidized housing looks at the occupants income and a percentage is taken for rent.  What's the real difference between Government subsidized housing and PMQ's anyway?  Most Q's I've seen are nothing spectacular, and some are downright junk.  Quick builds designed to provide shelter to soldier's and their families. 

By doing this, the Forces would also be lowering the risk of young families going through financial hardship.  I know here in Ontario, hydro costs are ridiculous and heating bills in the winter are harsh as well.  A car payment, utilities, insurance and groceries to feed a young family can chew up the lower ranks pay very quickly.  The senior NCO's are the ones that end up having to deal with these financial burdens when their creditors are calling the Unit looking for money.  I can go on an on, but there's no point as people's viewpoints are what they are. 

Regards

I think the delta between your reasonable platform and reality is the Treasury Board who has decided that is a subsidy and we are thus not entitled.

 

[reccecrewman]

Have you EVER been in a subsidized housing area??  Most occupants are there because it makes the beer, nice cars, and dope cheaper.  [but that's a whole 'nother thread]
To stick to your post, just where does the other percentage come from??........oh yea, from other folks taxes who then have less money to spend on their own housing.

I have been in alot of subsidized housing developments over the course of my life Bruce.  I know many of the people who live in them are hardworking minimum wage earners who cannot, nor will they ever be able to scrape together enough cash to get their own home.  Of course there are people in them who are bottom feeders, but I digress.  I wasn't talking about the occupants of the subsidized housing, I was talking about the model of how rent is calculated.

To your second comment on just where the other percentage comes from - For the most part, PMQ's on our Canadian Forces Bases are of the post WWII era and into the 1950's.  These houses costs have long ago been paid off by generations of soldiers living in them for the past 50-60 years.  What we have now, are maintenance and upkeep costs, which the current occupants are paying more than enough to take care of.  Yes, there is new construction here and there, but for the most part, PMQ's are not new builds.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not advocating for Privates and Corporals to have virtually free housing.  I just think they can afford to shave off some of the rent due for lower ranks.

 

[reccecrewman]

Isn't true at my current mess or any other that I recall.

CFB Petawawa Coriano Junior ranks Mess - $7.08 a month plus HST for ordinary members
CFB Petawawa Reichwald Mess for Senior NCO's - $17.00 a month plus HST for ordinary members
CFB Petawawa Normandy Officer's Mess - $28.25 a month for ordinary members.

The following link substantiates my statement;
http://www.cg.cfpsa.ca/cg-pc/Petawawa/EN/Messes/Coriano/Pages/default.aspx

I was merely pointing out that mess dues are on a sliding scale that highlight the income difference of lower ranks to senior ranks, why not use that same logical reasoning to the PMQ rents..

 

[McG]

CFB Petawawa Coriano Junior ranks Mess - $7.08 a month plus HST for ordinary members
CFB Petawawa Reichwald Mess for Senior NCO's - $17.00 a month plus HST for ordinary members
CFB Petawawa Normandy Officer's Mess - $28.25 a month for ordinary members.

The following link substantiates my statement;
http://www.cg.cfpsa.ca/cg-pc/Petawawa/EN/Messes/Coriano/Pages/default.aspx

I was merely pointing out that mess dues are on a sliding scale that highlight the income difference of lower ranks to senior ranks, why not use that same logical reasoning to the PMQ rents..

Mess Dues are set by the membership.  They are not on a sliding scale.

 

[Shamrock]

Mess Dues are set by the membership.  They are not on a sliding scale.

I wondered about that, and perhaps there's someone who can provide an answer.  In areas where officers outnumber troops (assuming such places exist), are their mess fees lower?

 

[reccecrewman]

Mess Dues are set by the membership.  They are not on a sliding scale.

Ok fine - but there is still a substantial difference between what the JR's are paying and what Officer's are paying.

 

[dapaterson]

Ok fine - but there is still a substantial difference between what the JR's are paying and what Officer's are paying.

Yes.  Each mess sets its rate.

The only permissible variation is that messes may charge OCdts less than commissioned officers (it's been a while, so I do not have the reference handy).  But all ranks within a mess are charged the same rate.

 

[Edward Campbell]

There was a day, not all that many years decades back when, for officers, at least, mess charges - dues and charges for events - were calculated on a pro rata basis. A LCol, for example, paid more for, essentially, the same service or meal, than did a Capt or a 2Lt, based on the fact that he, the LCol, made more money. There were pros and cons to the system ... the pros really don't matter as the system is long gone.

 

[George Wallace]

Mess Dues are set by the membership.  They are not on a sliding scale.

I wondered about that, and perhaps there's someone who can provide an answer.  In areas where officers outnumber troops (assuming such places exist), are their mess fees lower?

???

The Membership of the Mess approve all changes to Mess Dues at Mess Meetings.  Population demographics of a Base/Station/Unit/Ship/Installation have nothing to do with the population demographics of individual Messes.  If, for example, the Mess membership of a Jnr Ranks Mess approved higher Mess Dues than an Officers' Mess, then it is within their rights to do so.

 

[captloadie]

Mess dues are usually calculated to be the bare minimum to cover operating expenses (minus the bar), gift funds, and the fund to purchase new equipment. If you have a very profitable bar, you can subsidize the other funds and lower the mess dues. You cannot subsidize the bar with higher mess dues (ask the WO and Sgt's Mess in Cold Lake what happens if you do).

 

[Biggoals2bdone]

A Corporal with a wife and 3 children should pay less rent than a Warrant with 3 children.  Barracks rates and Mess dues are reflective of rank, why not Q's?

I will agree with others sentiment in not agreeing with this model.  To a degree $ of Qs is decided by rank as it is, since they cannot charge you more than 25% of your monthly pay.

I also don't think that you should get to pay less because you have kids.  Just because someone doesn't have kids doesn't mean they don't have other expenses that can't be put off. Maybe that was not the intent of the example, if not then I don't understand why 3 children were used in the example.  I'm married without kids, and I can't even afford a house here in Pet, so yes I feel the crunch that everyone else does as well.

My "kids" are my dogs and I don't expect to be given any breaks on what to pay because of the expenses they make me have.

I have to agree. Frankly I think the PMQs ought to be there mainly for lower ranks first. I know most bases do offer PMQs in reverse order of rank. They ought to be affordable to those who need them.

The military makes special demands on families. They require soldiers to move, to uproot their families frequently. At the same time, having a dual income household is more and more the norm and more and more a neccessity. Being married to a CAF member makes it much more difficult for a spouse to build a real career of their own.

While growing up I didn't know anyone who had a single income family, as far as personal history goes dual income families have been the norm in Canada for years.  The only thing is, as you've mentioned we move a lot, and at least 50-60% of the postings are in small little crappy areas with almost zero good opportunities for spouses to find work besides minimum wage jobs.

My wife has 3 college diplomas and can't find work...do you know how frustrating that is for someone who has worked since they were 14-15, and how that limits what we can do (leisure, buy a home, car, student loans, etc)

Its not going to happen but the CF should either get better postings or be more proactive with work opportunities for serving members spouses, like I said neither of which will happen, and that is yet another reason why members leave the CF. 

 

[Transporter]

My "kids" are my dogs and I don't expect to be given any breaks on what to pay because of the expenses they make me have.

All due respect, but any valid argument that you had, or wished to have, on this topic went out the window as soon as you posted this.

 

[Biggoals2bdone]

That's BULL

and if you can't understand that statement for what it is, in that I am saying my dogs are my family and cost me money (food, vet bills, any kennel costs) as well as causing difficulties when I have to be gone all of a sudden, instead of in some creepy/juvenile way, then you need to grow up.

Oh sorry I forgot to add, with all due respect, since apparently you can add that and say anything after.

 

[Halifax Tar]

That's BULL

and if you can't understand that statement for what it is, in that I am saying my dogs are my family and cost me money (food, vet bills, any kennel costs) as well as causing difficulties when I have to be gone all of a sudden, instead of in some creepy/juvenile way, then you need to grow up.

Oh sorry I forgot to add, with all due respect, since apparently you can add that and say anything after.

It does come off as if you are compaing a pet(s) to someones children.  Surly you must see the difference

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

That's BULL

and if you can't understand that statement for what it is, in that I am saying my dogs are my family and cost me money (food, vet bills, any kennel costs) as well as causing difficulties when I have to be gone all of a sudden, instead of in some creepy/juvenile way, then you need to grow up.

Oh sorry I forgot to add, with all due respect, since apparently you can add that and say anything after.

I have to agree with transporter, comparing your dogs to children is ridiculous.

Children cost far more than dogs, even when you include their food, vet bills, kennel costs, grooming, etc. Children are also, you know, human and your ACTUAL kids... dogs are dogs. And before you say something, I also own 2 cats and a dog, whom I have affection for, but still find it entirely ridiculous that you would state that.

Further, your statement about better job opportunities or postings to help spouses... the bases are where they are for a very good reason- they are able to conduct military training in places such as Gagetown, Wainwright, Pet, etc without disturbing local populations, and the cost of the land was cheap enough to allow a base to be built. If we moved all the garrisons into larger centres we would still need to keep the austere bases open to conduct REAL training and would actually, in my opinion, HURT members. Look at the costs of living in Edmonton vs Gagetown or Ottawa vs. Petawawa. Throwing a large number of service members into more expensive urban centres would in all likelihood make the majority of families worse off than if they remained in the more austere postings.

 

[Transporter]

That's BULL

and if you can't understand that statement for what it is, in that I am saying my dogs are my family and cost me money (food, vet bills, any kennel costs) as well as causing difficulties when I have to be gone all of a sudden, instead of in some creepy/juvenile way, then you need to grow up.

Oh sorry I forgot to add, with all due respect, since apparently you can add that and say anything after.

I have two dogs.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I have two dogs and 15 month old kid... I love my dogs, they are my hunting partner(s) but they dont hold a candle to my child and the are definatly less expensive even combined.

 

[McG]

I think the point on the K9 analogy is made.  Let's move back to the topic.