Retro Pay & Allow 1Apr 2014 - 1Apr 2017
- Thread starter Transporter
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Navy_Pete said:You can figure this out the same way as compound interest, but roughly for the years of increase you multiply it by;
First year - monthly pay x 1.25 = difference in monthly pay for year
Second year - monthly pay x 2.52
Third year - monthly pay x 3.8
Fourth year - monthly pay x 5.09
Fifth year - monthly pay x 6.41
...
anic: Warning! Math ahead!
new rate = current rate *(1+annual increase)^number of years gives you overall percent
example in year two = current rate * (1 + 0.0125) ^2
=current rate *1.0252 = new total monthly rate
pretty decent explanation here; https://www.mathsisfun.com/money/compound-interest.html
Compound interest is crazy that way; an annual 1.25% increase gives you a 13% growth over 10 years. Or do 1.5% a month (18% year) for credit card interest and you can see how fast your debt grows.
What on earth ... where are you getting these percentages? I'm by far the greatest at math (3 x 6 = blue) but I read your mathplay link and I see it differently - as in exactly what the link says... a 1.25% raise at year one is still a 1.25% raise at year 4... you just add the 1.25 from year 1 to the base of year 2, and then again for year 3 and so on...
- Reaction score
- 4,698
- Points
- 1,160
EME101 said:
You're barking up the wrong tree. CAF pay is an average of all those "direct comparisons", so just because one got 9% doesn't mean everyone will get it. If you believe there's a large enough gap between military and PS VHEs, then someone in the RCEME should be doing up the paperwork to justify a pay review and ask for Spec 1. Having everyone go to that 9% adjustment would disproportionately give a bigger raise to military pers compared to their civilian counterparts, and that would never happen.
- Reaction score
- 1,724
- Points
- 1,140
BinRat55 said:
1x1.0125x1.0125x1.0125x1.0125x1.0125x1.0125x1.0125x1.0125x1.0125x1.0125
If you start with 1$,
After a year, you have 1.0125$ (1$ + 0.0125x1$)
After 2 years, you have 1.02516$ (1.0125 + 0.0125x1.0125)
After 3 years, you have 1.03797$ (1.02516 + 0.0125x1.02516)
And so on...
After 10 years, you'd get 1.1323$ or a growth of 13.23% (rather than 12.5% if you were to purely add up 1.25% 10 times over)
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Ok I know this is difficult for me I promise this will be my last post on the topic as I just don't seem to be getting it... I want to figure out where I am going wrong on this math (it's not about how much I will see anymore it's about trying to understand this!!)
Here is what I am doing is as plain speak as I can...
If, in 2014 I was making 6200 a month, a 1.25% raise would add approx. 77.50 on to what I should have been making. So - 77.50 X 12 months in 2014 = 930.00. I am owed 930.00 for 2014.
In 2015, my pay would have been 6277.50 a month. A 1.25% raise would add approx. 78.50 on to what I should have been making. 78.50 X 12 months in 2015 = 942.00. I am owed 942.00 for 2015.
In 2016, my pay would have been 6356.00 a month. A 1.25% raise would add approx. 79.50 on to what I should have been making. 79.50 X 12 months in 2016 = 954.00. I am owed 954.00 for 2016.
930 + 942 + 954 = 2826.00 (gross)
Another way I see it:
2014 Should be making -- 6277.00 a month X 12 = 75324.00
Was making -- 6200.00 a month X 12 = 74400.00
----------------
924.00
2015 Should be making -- 6356.00 a month X 12 = 76272.00
Was making -- 6277.00 a month X 12 = 75324.00
----------------
948.00
2016 Should be making -- 6435.00 a month X 12 = 77220.00
Was making -- 6356.00 a month X 12 = 76272.00
----------------
948.00
Now, for those of you who are going to tell me that my "was making" should stay at 6200.00 a month through all years - that logic is flawed as the payout for the year previous is already factored in, ergo once the first years payout has been rectified (924.00) the second year you are considered to have been sitting at the right base amount and so on...
What am I not seeing?
Here is what I am doing is as plain speak as I can...
If, in 2014 I was making 6200 a month, a 1.25% raise would add approx. 77.50 on to what I should have been making. So - 77.50 X 12 months in 2014 = 930.00. I am owed 930.00 for 2014.
In 2015, my pay would have been 6277.50 a month. A 1.25% raise would add approx. 78.50 on to what I should have been making. 78.50 X 12 months in 2015 = 942.00. I am owed 942.00 for 2015.
In 2016, my pay would have been 6356.00 a month. A 1.25% raise would add approx. 79.50 on to what I should have been making. 79.50 X 12 months in 2016 = 954.00. I am owed 954.00 for 2016.
930 + 942 + 954 = 2826.00 (gross)
Another way I see it:
2014 Should be making -- 6277.00 a month X 12 = 75324.00
Was making -- 6200.00 a month X 12 = 74400.00
----------------
924.00
2015 Should be making -- 6356.00 a month X 12 = 76272.00
Was making -- 6277.00 a month X 12 = 75324.00
----------------
948.00
2016 Should be making -- 6435.00 a month X 12 = 77220.00
Was making -- 6356.00 a month X 12 = 76272.00
----------------
948.00
Now, for those of you who are going to tell me that my "was making" should stay at 6200.00 a month through all years - that logic is flawed as the payout for the year previous is already factored in, ergo once the first years payout has been rectified (924.00) the second year you are considered to have been sitting at the right base amount and so on...
What am I not seeing?
- Reaction score
- 4,698
- Points
- 1,160
You missed the 1.2% military factor increase in FY16/17 which would give you another 6356*1.012=6614.43 which is $78.43 a month back pay = $941.18 for the year. You also have May/June pays (another 1.25%) which were $6200 instead of $6697.11, which is 2 months of backpay totalling $994.22.
Keep in mind I'm a SigOp not a MathOp so I stand to be corrected, but I see the rest of your numbers correct. Your backpay total for this example would be $4761.40
Keep in mind I'm a SigOp not a MathOp so I stand to be corrected, but I see the rest of your numbers correct. Your backpay total for this example would be $4761.40
- Reaction score
- 406
- Points
- 780
Binrat,
The flaw in your logic is you are not accumulating your retro back pay. So, you calculation for 2014 is correct. For 2015, you are only calculating the additional increase to the new base pay. But you weren't paid the new base pay in 2015. You were paid the old rate of 6200. The increases are cumulative, and you aren't calculating them that way because of the way you are doing the math.
Look at it this way for the first 1.25% raise, they owe it to you for all 4 years. For the next 1.25%, they owe it to you for 3 years. For the next 1.25%, they owe it to you for 2 years. For the next 1.25%, plus the 1.2% mill factor, they owe it to you for 1 year. Then they owe you the new rate for an additional 3 months. The final percentage is a little off because of the effects of compound interest, but the spreadsheet posted earlier accounts for that.
The flaw in your logic is you are not accumulating your retro back pay. So, you calculation for 2014 is correct. For 2015, you are only calculating the additional increase to the new base pay. But you weren't paid the new base pay in 2015. You were paid the old rate of 6200. The increases are cumulative, and you aren't calculating them that way because of the way you are doing the math.
Look at it this way for the first 1.25% raise, they owe it to you for all 4 years. For the next 1.25%, they owe it to you for 3 years. For the next 1.25%, they owe it to you for 2 years. For the next 1.25%, plus the 1.2% mill factor, they owe it to you for 1 year. Then they owe you the new rate for an additional 3 months. The final percentage is a little off because of the effects of compound interest, but the spreadsheet posted earlier accounts for that.
- Reaction score
- 2,476
- Points
- 1,190
Does anyone have the previous pay scales? They seem to have replaced the "2013" pay scales on the website with the 2017 pay scales, but the link still says that they are the 2013 ones.
I'm trying to figure out what IPC I'm at, but since my pay office is an hour away, I'm trying to just compare what my current pay statement says against the old pay scale. I believe I'm IPC 5, but want to make sure.
I'm trying to figure out what IPC I'm at, but since my pay office is an hour away, I'm trying to just compare what my current pay statement says against the old pay scale. I believe I'm IPC 5, but want to make sure.
- Reaction score
- 27,458
- Points
- 1,090
Legacy rates are available at: http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/caf-community-pay/pay-rates.page
- Reaction score
- 2,476
- Points
- 1,190
dapaterson said:
Tried those. They have the "After March 2012" rates, but not the "After March 2013" rates.
Anyway, I just realized I could multiply my current pay on my pay statement by 1.0634 and it gives me the new pay, then I compare to current pay scale, and voila, IPC 5.
Cheers
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 280
Do these increases apply to PLD as well?
What are the yearly increases for that? Says allowances 5%, but there is no breakdown.
What are the yearly increases for that? Says allowances 5%, but there is no breakdown.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 280
BobSlob said:
5% across the board starting April 2014 (so backpay expected) or 30 June 2017?
trooper142
Jr. Member
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
Lumber said:
Where are you seeing 2017 Rates? I clicked on the 2013 pay rates and they are still looking like the 2013 rates!
- Reaction score
- 4,698
- Points
- 1,160
BobSlob said:
PLD wasn't touched, its only for allowances in CBI 205. There's a table here at the bottom covering all the allowance increases: http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/caf-community-benefits/know-your-benefits-articles/pay-raise.page
Messerschmitt: I believe its 5.1% compounded, which is the 1.25% increase applied without the military factor that the base pay scale got. Backpay is "supposed" to be 30 Jun 17 pay, but I wouldn't hold your breath.
We'll get to start another thread soon when the public service unions start bargaining again for the CBA that'll start FY18-22. This is just a result of them dragging their feet with the previous government and trying to get a better deal with the Liberals.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 280
trooper142 said:
It shows 2017. Your browser cache is still probably old. Press Ctrl+F5.
Hopefully they will release the PDF for 2013 rates like they do with 2012. Currently they just updated the web page directly with the new numbers.
trooper142
Jr. Member
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
Messerschmitt said:
Tried Ctrl F5 and no luck!
Anyway someone can post a picture of the new rates!?
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 280
- Reaction score
- 27,458
- Points
- 1,090
Read carefully. Col and above are 2013 payrates, as their pay is benchmarked against different groups. LCol and below are 2017.
It's all in the notes, if you look carefully.
It's all in the notes, if you look carefully.
Similar threads
