I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)

[Transporter]

Well, aren't we all special?

First, a history lesson (and, yes, I know I'm repeating myself): in the real decades of darkness, when Rick Hillier was still a schoolboy, the army was, as it had been for decades centuries millennia, underpaid - sometimes so grossly underpaid that it had real trouble attracting anything but the absolute dregs of society into its ranks. By the 1960s things needed to change. We, Navy, Army and Air Force, were changing - new, sophisticated weapon systems, alone, required "better" people to operate and maintain them. Successive Canadian Ministers of National Defence, post about 1955, saw this and went to cabinet with proposals to increase defence spending to accomplish two things: a) buy all this fancy new, high tech (for their day) weapons systems and b) hire the right sort of people, people who could command good salaries on "civvie street," to operate and maintain them. Successive governments, cabinets, including the ones led by "friends" of the military, like Lester B Pearson (himself a combat veteran), denied those budget increases. One of the primary goals of one part of Minister Paul Hellyer's experiment was to address  that issue by, in effect, destroying the ranks of corporal and captain in order to give junior soldiers and junior officers real, useful salaries. The other big part of that decision was to "benchmark" selected military occupations to civil service equivalents and adjust military pay accordingly. It was, without putting too fine a point on it, a stroke of bureaucratic genius ... I notice no one here suggests we go back to the old system, going hat in hand to cabinet for pay and allowances, and it would be stupid to do so. You are, for all intents and purposes, public servants and, today, in the 21st century there is a broad and general perception that public sector pay and benefits, including pensions, are too generous. The government is, mainly, resounding to the "will of the people" when it cuts benefits.

Second, some of you amaze me with your ignorance. MARS explained that he loves the responsibilities of command at sea, he is, as are many, many CF members, officers and NCMs alike, living a dream. Do sailors "make way" when he's hurrying to the bridge? Yes, they do. Is that a "perk?" Are they "tugging their forelocks," 21st century style? I suppose some stupid people think so, but I guarantee you that the smart people are making way because they want MARS on his bridge, they know that he is needed there to make decisions - sometimes life and death decisions: decisions about their lives. It is the same in the Army when the CO goes into his command post - the CP crew makes way for him at the map and someone fetches a coffee. Are they "sucking up?" No. They, too, want the CO to make a decision, about all those red marks on that map. It, the command decisions, are his burden, as are the tough decisions on the bridge MARS' burden; and they are not burdens that any ship's captain or any CO can or would share with any of you ... no matter that, very often, they might wish they could. Those of you who think MARS and I and people like us are elitists or that we demand special treatment are amateurs, not military professionals, you want a job, not a calling. You are just uniformed civil servants.

It's been said before, but I'll echo it: get over yourselves. Yes, you're special ... but so are a lot of people, each in their own way, just as "special" as you. You made a career choice, you're welcome to make other choices. Of course it's your right to ***** and to question government polices - I would worry if you weren't bitching, but you are also displaying the enduring characteristics of Canadian civilians: greed and envy ... and it is unbecoming.

I get your points and agree with much of what you say. However, aren't the portions highlighted above contradictory?

 

[Edward Campbell]

I get your points and agree with much of what you say. However, aren't the portions highlighted above contradictory?

On the surface I suppose they appear that way.

You are part of the public sector. Our government has decided, wisely, in my view, and beneficially for you, to tie your remuneration to that of the unionized civil service work force.

But, you are not civil servants, you are part of the armed services and you get a few - maybe fewer than you would like - extra benefits to take account of your unique conditions of service. My rant at the end is based on a quip by Evelyn Waugh (In Officers and Gentlemen, I think) about he and his colleagues in arms being little more than "heavily armed civilians" or the "unformed civil service" or something like that. My point is that if you want to be civilians you have that option, the government did not introduce conscription while I wasn't looking.

You are special, but not all that special, and I repeat: the bitching is healthy ... but some of it is unbecoming.

 

[upandatom]

You are only looking at your own unique bubble upandatom and you don't have all your facts straight either.  Leave with income averaging is something that a member pays for.  It isn't free. And it needs to be approved.  You make it sound like everyone takes all their sick days and all their family related.  They don't.  There are also people that put in overtime and never ask to be compensated for it. 

How many times have you been let off early for long weekends or even on fridays?  How about mess events like men's x-mas dinners?  I can assure you that none of that is the norm in the PS.  Add that all up too.  Adventure training?  Yeah.  Or how about the hour for PT a day?  Right.  How many people take their hour at the end of the day only to disapear...the PS isn't the only one to have claim to malingerers either.

PS get 85% of dental, medical, prescriptions, eyewear covered.  How much do CF mmbers get covered for?  Oh yeah, right. 100%.

I agree, I am looking at my own bubble,

And to add, I sure hope we would get 100% medical coverage, as we are expected to be in top shape, healthy and fit.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

And to add, I sure hope we would get 100% medical coverage, as we are expected to be in top shape, healthy and fit.

So those of us who are expected to be all that but don't have 100% coverage, nor access to an MIR everyday, should be full of good whine like yourself??

 

[Infanteer]

In my element its astonding the lack of overall morale that we are facing right now, the amount of personnel with 10, 12  or 14 yrs in that are leaving is truely eyeopening, these are the people that we need to stay and build for the future. All the town halls that I have been to, paint a cheerly picture but it becomes quite evident that the powers to be are truely out of touch with the rank and file.

Is this a Navy problem?  I've got a parade square full of soldiers, attrition rate (appears) to me to be normal, and we are starting to get guys back from the oil patch who did a year of civilian life and realized the grass wasn't very green on the other side of the fence.

Not really seeing the sky falling from where I am sitting.  Certainly nobody is lining up to tell me that their pay and benefits suck or that the Public Service is screwing them over.

 

[upandatom]

So those of us who are expected to be all that but don't have 100% coverage, nor access to an MIR everyday, should be full of good whine like yourself??

Well if you dont, your either a Reservist or PS.
I dont know the whole ins and outs of the Reserves, Im sorry.

I do know, that even in OUTCANs and Small mission tours, there are always ways of arranging medical care,

As a matter of fact, part of the screening for places where there isnt an MIR, or there is limited healthcare, is a Health and mental health screening, whichs states that there isnt a critical condition.

 

[vonGarvin]

get over yourselves.

 

[Stoker]

Is this a Navy problem?  I've got a parade square full of soldiers, attrition rate (appears) to me to be normal, and we are starting to get guys back from the oil patch who did a year of civilian life and realized the grass wasn't very green on the other side of the fence.

Not really seeing the sky falling from where I am sitting.  Certainly nobody is lining up to tell me that their pay and benefits suck or that the Public Service is screwing them over.

Perhaps it is. There is a lot of disatisfaction right now with pers trying to have packages signed off on a increasingly shrinking number of platforms and this will continue at least in the short term. I know with the Mar Eng, many pers are disatisfied with the freeze of spec pay and the impending conbining of the ET and Mar Eng trades. Iriving will be hiring more personnel as the ship building ramps up and I expect some will go over to that. I went to a town hall a few months ago and a lot was said of the disatisfaction of their people. Like it was mentioned before the CF and the RCN will continue on regardless, but when you see people with 12, 13 years in suddenly get out that really concerns me.

 

[upandatom]

Perhaps it is. There is a lot of disatisfaction right now with pers trying to have packages signed off on a increasingly shrinking number of platforms and this will continue at least in the short term. I know with the Mar Eng, many pers are disatisfied with the freeze of spec pay and the impending conbining of the ET and Mar Eng trades. Iriving will be hiring more personnel as the ship building ramps up and I expect some will go over to that. I went to a town hall a few months ago and a lot was said of the disatisfaction of their people. Like it was mentioned before the CF and the RCN will continue on regardless, but when you see people with 12, 13 years in suddenly get out that really concerns me.

ITs kind of all over, Army Sigs is the same way right now.

 

[kratz]

Part of the challenge when comparing attrition rate between elements is shear numbers.
Losing 100 sailors vice losing 100 soldiers and seeing 5% of sailors or 20% soldiers reenroll
has a very different impact on each element, as the RCN is much smaller than the CA.
(NTF: numbers are used for example only)

 

[TCM621]

At the end of the day being in the CAF is a calling. If you are doing for strictly monetary reasons you will be dissatisfied. With that said, most of us joined under an expectation of certain benefits. Those benefits are being steadily reduced. Typically, the justification is to bring us inline with other public services. However, we are not like other public services, a fact we are constantly reminded of any time they get a benefit we don't.

For example, not only could public servants bank leave, they could take a pay out. They are entitled to more trips home when they are tasked away. They must request to be transferred, they cannot be posted against their will. Yet our posting benefits must be inline with theirs.

I am a lifer in the CAF and I truly have a hard time imagining myself in any life outside if it. I get that I, and my family, make certain sacrifices for my country and my chosen profession. What bugs me is that the senior leadership appears to be abdicating their responsibilities in many areas when it comes to the welfare of the troops. It is easy to throw up your hands and say, "I agree with you, you should get 100% HEA. But I can't do anything about it, that's Treasury Board" or "yes PMQs in Cold  lake are crappy and over priced. But that is CMHC's jurisdiction". You may argue that their hands are tied, but they allowed them to be tied and they need to untie them. That is their responsibility: to know their subordinates and promote their welfare.

Just once I would like a senior leader launch a challenge to promote our welfare, rather than parrot a line of bullshit. I know it would probably mean the end of their progression but it would go a long way to improve morale.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Perhaps it is. There is a lot of disatisfaction right now with pers trying to have packages signed off on a increasingly shrinking number of platforms and this will continue at least in the short term. I know with the Mar Eng, many pers are disatisfied with the freeze of spec pay and the impending conbining of the ET and Mar Eng trades. Iriving will be hiring more personnel as the ship building ramps up and I expect some will go over to that. I went to a town hall a few months ago and a lot was said of the disatisfaction of their people. Like it was mentioned before the CF and the RCN will continue on regardless, but when you see people with 12, 13 years in suddenly get out that really concerns me.

It's going to be a problem and fairly serious if many of the Cert 3's and 4's punch out, as I understand 100% of the Cert 4 and a very large number of the Cert 3 personnel are eligible for an immediate pension.  Many I know are very unhappy, especially re: the spec pay issue.  The knowledge and experience they possess doesn't grow on trees, took many years to acquire and will make a huge gap and capability issue if a mass exodus does come.  It comes up in discussion almost daily at work and today the talk was that the patch is recognizing the Stoker military quals, big time, now.

Yes, there is a normal attrition rate for most things.  When the CPF's and 280's etc were in the pipe, many took the leap and it will happen when and if the shipbuilding projects come on stream.  That alone will add to the losses and I believe is expected.  But if triggers start getting pulled, it will hurt and will adversely affect capabilities for a unknown period of time as it will be beyond normal attrition rates.  My  :2c:

 

[Navy_Pete]

It's going to be a problem and fairly serious if many of the Cert 3's and 4's punch out, as I understand 100% of the Cert 4 and a very large number of the Cert 3 personnel are eligible for an immediate pension.  Many I know are very unhappy, especially re: the spec pay issue.  The knowledge and experience they possess doesn't grow on trees, took many years to acquire and will make a huge gap and capability issue if a mass exodus does come.  It comes up in discussion almost daily at work and today the talk was that the patch is recognizing the Stoker military quals, big time, now.

Yes, there is a normal attrition rate for most things.  When the CPF's and 280's etc were in the pipe, many took the leap and it will happen when and if the shipbuilding projects come on stream.  That alone will add to the losses and I believe is expected.  But if triggers start getting pulled, it will hurt and will adversely affect capabilities for a unknown period of time as it will be beyond normal attrition rates.  My  :2c:

Also for the cert 2s who finished slogging through their two year OJTs and boards, got qualified, didn't get spec pay, and are now jetty hopping on MCDVs and frigates.  When you have years of further OJTs/boards ahead of you (argueably more then any other naval technician trade), and you get offers to go work somewhere else for far more cash, the part about it 'being a calling' wears pretty thin.  Don't think it's as prevalent for electricians, but the delta training for getting their industrial electrician ticket is pretty small, so I can see a number of them pulling the plug when the trade amalgamation rolls in.

Have been off the coast for a few years now, but Friday sliders are a thing of the past, and aside from the Christmas dinner, a lot of the fun things are disappearing.  And aside from the one or two missions where you actually do anything meaningful, most sailors aren't getting a lot sea time, and when you do, the ports are limited and you can spend half the port visit on duty depending on the force protection requirements or supporting repairs.

Add in one bad posting/supervisor or whatever, and there are enough small disatisfiers that doing just about anything else is appealing.  Money and benefits don't really matter at that point, but particularly not when the civilian working next to you is making the same/more for doing the same job, without any of the additional commitments.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Skill demand and portability keep popping up as factors.  There will always be occupations for which the qualifications are easily transferable and the private sector demand is high.  There is a limit to what the CF can do to compete without skewing its pay scales heavily and having to jerk them up and down in response to movements in the economy at large.

Most of the complaints regarding pullbacks don't look bad from where I have been sitting the past 5 years, and most of the summaries of pay and benefits look good.

Do the arithmetic on what you would need to save each year to buy your pension if you were entirely dependent on your own savings.

 

[Navy_Pete]

The pension argument is a bit of a red herring, as most people now will be unable to truly retire on a full pension, and it's only getting worse.  If you were to get an incremental pay raise in a new career and do something smart like pay off your mortgage early and invest a bit, you are probably better off financially.

I think the biggest kicker is probably the large size of even a modest mortgage now; it's getting increasingly unaffordable for most people to do anything less then a 20+ year mortgage.  Combine that with kids in school or something else similar, and folks work well past 60.

Money completely aside, with all the ISSCs coming down the pipe the work I really like to do is mostly going to be contracted.  So with all the fun work going, and our system getting increasingly paralyzed by bureaucracy (DPS anyone?), getting harder to find a reason to stick it out.  I think you can almost have more a direct and positive impact on the Navy working for a future ISSC then you can in the actual Navy, which is a bit ludicrous.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>The pension argument is a bit of a red herring

My point isn't with respect to whether it's enough to live on; my point is that the total cost of employer/employee contributions + private savings to achieve income target "$X" from a DB pension and private savings is generally less than the cost of private savings alone.  I'd be very happy if I could achieve my retirement target with, say, 6%-and-6% instead of 20%.

 

[upandatom]

At the end of the day being in the CAF is a calling. If you are doing for strictly monetary reasons you will be dissatisfied. With that said, most of us joined under an expectation of certain benefits. Those benefits are being steadily reduced. Typically, the justification is to bring us inline with other public services. However, we are not like other public services, a fact we are constantly reminded of any time they get a benefit we don't.

For example, not only could public servants bank leave, they could take a pay out. They are entitled to more trips home when they are tasked away. They must request to be transferred, they cannot be posted against their will. Yet our posting benefits must be inline with theirs.

I am a lifer in the CAF and I truly have a hard time imagining myself in any life outside if it. I get that I, and my family, make certain sacrifices for my country and my chosen profession. What bugs me is that the senior leadership appears to be abdicating their responsibilities in many areas when it comes to the welfare of the troops. It is easy to throw up your hands and say, "I agree with you, you should get 100% HEA. But I can't do anything about it, that's Treasury Board" or "yes PMQs in Cold  lake are crappy and over priced. But that is CMHC's jurisdiction". You may argue that their hands are tied, but they allowed them to be tied and they need to untie them. That is their responsibility: to know their subordinates and promote their welfare.

Just once I would like a senior leader launch a challenge to promote our welfare, rather than parrot a line of bullshit. I know it would probably mean the end of their progression but it would go a long way to improve morale.

:goodpost:

Have to agree with that 100%.
They can always say "your our priority" but I have yet to see actions that show that over the past few.

 

[Edward Campbell]

>The pension argument is a bit of a red herring

My point isn't with respect to whether it's enough to live on; my point is that the total cost of employer/employee contributions + private savings to achieve income target "$X" from a DB pension and private savings is generally less than the cost of private savings alone.  I'd be very happy if I could achieve my retirement target with, say, 6%-and-6% instead of 20%.

And this is part of the underlying reason that governments, local, provincial and federal, are "at war" with the public sector. The majority off Canadians do not have anything like the "generous" pay, benefits and, above all, defined benefit pension schemes that people on the public payroll enjoy. Further, that majority doesn't 'see' the sort of value in you, or a prison guard or a teacher or a nurse our any civil servant, that would justify the pay, benefits and pensions. The "claw backs" and "freezes" are mighty popular.

 

[George Wallace]

And this is part of the underlying reason that governments, local, provincial and federal, are "at war" with the public sector. The majority off Canadians do not have anything like the "generous" pay, benefits and, above all, defined benefit pension schemes that people on the public payroll enjoy. Further, that majority doesn't 'see' the sort of value in you, or a prison guard or a teacher or a nurse our any civil servant, that would justify the pay, benefits and pensions. The "claw backs" and "freezes" are mighty popular.

At the same time, it is not the fault of the Public Sector Unions for having fought for pensions.  Many Private Sector companies have pension plans for their employees.  Perhaps it is time for those who do not have some sort of pension plan in their workplace to stand up and fight for one.  Those not in a position to be in a Union or workplace that is large enough to facilitate one, should then do some financial planning of their own and create a "Retirement Savings Plan".  The fact that so many in this country can't plan past the ends of their noses, or further than the present, should not have them rallying against those who have a plan for their retirement.  "Generous" payments of pensions to those who have worked towards their pensions, only reflects on the lack of knowledge of those protesting.  What is even more disconcerting, is not that Public Sector, Military and RCMP pension plans are being affected, but that the public is totally ignoring the "LAVISH" pensions that our political figures have garnered for themselves, with much less time in service to their country, province, community.  Where is the uproar there?

 

[dapaterson]

What is even more disconcerting, is not that Public Sector, Military and RCMP pension plans are being affected, but that the public is totally ignoring the "LAVISH" pensions that our political figures have garnered for themselves, with much less time in service to their country, province, community.  Where is the uproar there?

Define "Lavish".  Do you know the terms of the MP pension plan?  Have you ever stood up for election - with your job at stake every four years?  Would you take years out of your peak earning period to try?

Would you rather have a political system that only permits the idle rich to run for office?