Class Action Suit against NVC & "Govt has no obligation to soldiers"

[dapaterson]

When the judgement includes the term "prolix", it's not a rousing endorsement of counsel.

 

[JesseWZ]

Hearing rumblings online now about veterans groups actively trying to dissuade people from joining the CAF.

Not sure what course this will take, if any, but if the Vets walk the same as they talk we could be in for a bombastic and dramatic time until election 2019.

I respectfully disagree. The average Canadian may not actually know any vets or serving members for that matter. Even if Vets are loud and proud, I don't think Vets issues will sway an election/popular opinion. The demographic is pretty small per capita and many (most?) are already vehemently anti JT/Liberal.

 

[ModlrMike]

The only type of life long pension we're going to see is an option to take the current award over time versus lump sum. There will be no change to the amounts. The reduction in the government's cost of life long pensions was the core issue in the development of the NVC. It wasn't about making it better for veterans, it was about making it cheaper for government. There will be no turning back the clock here.

 

[brihard]

The only type of life long pension we're going to see is an option to take the current award over time versus lump sum. There will be no change to the amounts. The reduction in the government's cost of life long pensions was the core issue in the development of the NVC. It wasn't about making it better for veterans, it was about making it cheaper for government. There will be no turning back the clock here.

The existing lump sum can already be spread over time, so it will necessarily be something different from that.

 

[Lumber]

Hearing rumblings online now about veterans groups actively trying to dissuade people from joining the CAF.

Well I’m hearing pickets around recruiting offices.

This pisses me right the f*** off. Yes, I believe the government has an obligation to support injured soldiers, and I hope we return to life long pensions, should it not bankrupt the government. However, I signed up to serve in uniform because I believe in standing up for Canadian values and providing a layer of protection to Canadian citizens. I did this regardless of the benefits, and I'd keep doing it even if our benefits were greatly reduced.

Trying to dissuade others from joining the CAF, IMO, does nothing but damage the security of our country. Take up your issues at the polls.

 

[Jarnhamar]

The Minister of Veterans Affairs releases a pretty bland statement today, but noticeably it promises that the ‘pension option’ will be finalized by the end of this year. My guess is we see legislation tabled just before the holiday recess, and that that bill along with C-42 get fast tracked in the winter/spring sitting for budget 2018.

I expect a little pay increase right before election time to make us all forget about this (and I already spent mine )

This pisses me right the f*** off.

Trying to dissuade others from joining the CAF, IMO, does nothing but damage the security of our country. Take your up your issues at the polls.

100%. Selfish.
We have enough problems recruiting and training others to pass the torch to, we don't need this.

 

[meni0n]

I got 5$ on that they will raise the maximum payout again right before elections.

 

[Strike]

Well, if it makes anyone feel better, not only are they going after disabled vets, but people with Type 1 diabetes and victims of Thalidomide.  So that's three separate organizations affecting three different groups that all have the "disability" label in common.

Just sayin'...

 

[Lumber]

100%. Selfish.
We have enough problems recruiting and training others to pass the torch to, we don't need this.

You were agreeing with me, right? Not calling me selfish?

 

[Cloud Cover]

Those comments by Minister Hehr were shocking. Wtf is wrong with some of these guys?

 

[Jarnhamar]

You were agreeing with me, right? Not calling me selfish?

I was agreeing with you yes. I think you hit the nail on the head.

 

[Kat Stevens]

At the risk of getting another yellow card, I just gotta say this.  While as a starry eyed 17 year old I did not join the army with much thought toward benefits and payouts. I wanted to go around the world and get into punch ups with bad people and break their toys. However, I did expect that, should the horrible of horrible happen, my willingness to get roughed up on my country’s behalf should be worth something. I was always told loyalty goes up AND down. Clearly that is not the case. With the current situation, I would dissuade any young family member of mine from following my example. But I’m just a dumb lifer corporal, what do I know?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The only type of life long pension we're going to see is an option to take the current award over time versus lump sum. There will be no change to the amounts. The reduction in the government's cost of life long pensions was the core issue in the development of the NVC. It wasn't about making it better for veterans, it was about making it cheaper for government. There will be no turning back the clock here.

Pretty difinitive statement opinion. Do you work for the MoVAC? Part of the drafting team? Not that I disagree. Just wondering where you got the inside scoop.

 

[ModlrMike]

Pretty difinitive statement opinion. Do you work for the MoVAC? Part of the drafting team? Not that I disagree. Just wondering where you got the inside scoop.

Call it experiential pessimism.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

You were agreeing with me, right? Not calling me selfish?

Whether or not you join is a personal decision. The same as anything this important, you should get the whole story. The fancy commercials put out by DND and the government's rousing statements should not be the sum of your investigation. If you seek out a Veteran and ask their opinion, if it doesn't match the government's pitch, that's a decision that the investigator will have to weigh as part of their choice. If that Veteran decides to tell the truth, that he served honourably, got injured and tossed to the curb by said government, then the person gets the bad also.

The other option, have the Veteran lie and tow the party line, in the interest of deceiving the applicant. You'll only end up with another generation of disgruntled service people, that feel the government deceived them.

What better than the truth. "We are going to send you to fight terrorists that threaten our country and our way of life. We want you to be professional about it and try not offend your enemy. Even so, some of you will be wounded or killed. No matter, when you get back and are injured, we'll make you sue us to get what you deserve. We have no sacred obligation to those of you silly enough to believe what we promise. We're politicians. As a matter of fact, those guys that killed your buddies and wrecked your life? We're going to bring them here, give them all kinds of free money, support, succor and teach them poetry. That way they won't keep trying to kill you and families..............we hope. If you don't agree, you're an islamaphobe."

Or do you help, possibly ruining someone's life, by lying to them about the truth of what's happening, to keep your recruiting numbers up?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Call it experiential pessimism.

Can we do that again then? Express our opinion for fact. I've been around a long time also. I have plenty of pessimism.  :rofl:

 

[Halifax Tar]

Whether or not you join is a personal decision. The same as anything this important, you should get the whole story. The fancy commercials put out by DND and the government's rousing statements should not be the sum of your investigation. If you seek out a Veteran and ask their opinion, if it doesn't match the government's pitch, that's a decision that the investigator will have to weigh as part of their choice. If that Veteran decides to tell the truth, that he served honourably, got injured and tossed to the curb by said government, then the person gets the bad also.

The other option, have the Veteran lie and tow the party line, in the interest of deceiving the applicant. You'll only end up with another generation of disgruntled service people, that feel the government deceived them.

What better than the truth. "We are going to send you to fight terrorists that threaten our country and our way of life. We want you to be professional about it and try not offend your enemy. Even so, some of you will be wounded or killed. No matter, when you get back and are injured, we'll make you sue us to get what you deserve. We have no sacred obligation to those of you silly enough to believe what we promise. We're politicians. As a matter of fact, those guys that killed your buddies and wrecked your life? We're going to bring them here, give them all kinds of free money, support, succor and teach them poetry. That way they won't keep trying to kill you and families..............we hope. If you don't agree, you're an islamaphobe."

Or do you help, possibly ruining someone's life, by lying to them about the truth of what's happening, to keep your recruiting numbers up?

Excellent post.

Honestly I am not sure I would be comfortable with a recruitment tasking where I was going to encourage people to join this organization. I am a terrible liar. 

 

[NavyShooter]

Whether or not you join is a personal decision. The same as anything this important, you should get the whole story. The fancy commercials put out by DND and the government's rousing statements should not be the sum of your investigation. If you seek out a Veteran and ask their opinion, if it doesn't match the government's pitch, that's a decision that the investigator will have to weigh as part of their choice. If that Veteran decides to tell the truth, that he served honourably, got injured and tossed to the curb by said government, then the person gets the bad also.

The other option, have the Veteran lie and tow the party line, in the interest of deceiving the applicant. You'll only end up with another generation of disgruntled service people, that feel the government deceived them.

What better than the truth. "We are going to send you to fight terrorists that threaten our country and our way of life. We want you to be professional about it and try not offend your enemy. Even so, some of you will be wounded or killed. No matter, when you get back and are injured, we'll make you sue us to get what you deserve. We have no sacred obligation to those of you silly enough to believe what we promise. We're politicians. As a matter of fact, those guys that killed your buddies and wrecked your life? We're going to bring them here, give them all kinds of free money, support, succor and teach them poetry. That way they won't keep trying to kill you and families..............we hope. If you don't agree, you're an islamaphobe."

Or do you help, possibly ruining someone's life, by lying to them about the truth of what's happening, to keep your recruiting numbers up?

I'm with Halifax Tar. 

I am getting more and more jaded in my life experiences.  This year has been a tough one for that.  I've had numerous opportunities to learn about "Institutional Leadership" and I'm not terribly thrilled with what I've seen.

Putting me in any sort of recruiting role right now would be...insightful...for the potential applicants.

NS

 

[Jarnhamar]

I'm with Halifax Tar. 

I am getting more and more jaded in my life experiences.  This year has been a tough one for that.  I've had numerous opportunities to learn about "Institutional Leadership" and I'm not terribly thrilled with what I've seen.

Putting me in any sort of recruiting role right now would be...insightful...for the potential applicants.

NS

I was thinking about this a lot after I posted.

I'm definitely in that boat. There's a large number issues that have caused me to lose faith in the system. The culminating point for me was reading we're letting terrorists back into Canada, not charging them. (I feel absolutely betrayed)

I'd be very honest about my views (like telling someone to get college before joining and how the family first is bukkshit) but in the context of this thread I wouldn't actively all of a sudden protest a recruiting office because I didn't get my money the liberals promised.  If that makes sense.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I was thinking about this a lot after I posted.

I'm definitely in that boat. There's a large number issues that have caused me to lose faith in the system. The culminating point for me was reading we're letting terrorists back into Canada, not charging them. (I feel absolutely betrayed)

I'd be very honest about my views (like telling someone to get college before joining and how the family first is bukkshit) but in the context of this thread I wouldn't actively all of a sudden protest a recruiting office because I didn't get my money the liberals promised.  If that makes sense.

I think you make sense and we are in agreement in all facets.