Simon Logan v. Her Majesty The Queen
- Thread starter gryphonv
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 6,516
- Points
- 1,040
It was pretty specific that it was the pay and monthly allowances you are getting at time of release. Aside from his base pay, this was what was in the complaint;
If you read the claim, the argument included that the spec ops allowance was given because of their special skillset and risks, so is similar to the separate payscales for the doctors, pilots etc. That's completely reasonable to me, but looks more like someone put this in place to give them something equivalent to spec pay, but probably had quicker/different approval levels. 75% of PLD is pretty much nothing for most people (or actually nothing), but for almost $4k a month for the spec op assaulter allowance that's a huge difference.
Not sure how you would still be receiving theatre allowances, field/sea pay etc when you get released, but there are probably a bunch of similar allowances like this where it will make a difference for a lot of people. Things may have changed, but thought things like sea pay cease when you are transferred over to JPSU. I can see GoC changing all the allowances after this so that most of those stop as soon as you are posted to JPSU on the way out, but they can't make that affect those that have already been released.
For the assaulters that would be pretty insulting; kind of BS to run them that hard and break them early but cut them out of the medical release benefits. Would personally chalk it up to the cost of doing business and having those kind of high tempo units, but bean counters and lawyers will find a way to screw people (even though the staff costs are probably pretty significant to do so).
If you read the claim, the argument included that the spec ops allowance was given because of their special skillset and risks, so is similar to the separate payscales for the doctors, pilots etc. That's completely reasonable to me, but looks more like someone put this in place to give them something equivalent to spec pay, but probably had quicker/different approval levels. 75% of PLD is pretty much nothing for most people (or actually nothing), but for almost $4k a month for the spec op assaulter allowance that's a huge difference.
Not sure how you would still be receiving theatre allowances, field/sea pay etc when you get released, but there are probably a bunch of similar allowances like this where it will make a difference for a lot of people. Things may have changed, but thought things like sea pay cease when you are transferred over to JPSU. I can see GoC changing all the allowances after this so that most of those stop as soon as you are posted to JPSU on the way out, but they can't make that affect those that have already been released.
For the assaulters that would be pretty insulting; kind of BS to run them that hard and break them early but cut them out of the medical release benefits. Would personally chalk it up to the cost of doing business and having those kind of high tempo units, but bean counters and lawyers will find a way to screw people (even though the staff costs are probably pretty significant to do so).
- Reaction score
- 4,923
- Points
- 1,160
Navy_Pete said:
Assaulters and SF Ops allowances also are not pensionable. So even if they're not injured when they release, they're getting a basic rank level pension.
- Reaction score
- 28,761
- Points
- 1,090
PuckChaser said:
Except SF Op, as an occupation and not a managed specialty, receive spec pay, which means their pensions will be higher.
- Reaction score
- 213
- Points
- 880
dapaterson said:
Is this a recent change? I know CBRN Op gets Spec 1...did not know SF Op was getting it now.
As for the court case, I'm glad to see the decision on this was a thumbs up...although I think it would be a mistake to include PLD in the new calculations. Hopefully just environmental allowances.
- Reaction score
- 28,761
- Points
- 1,090
I may have misspoke - the last list of occupations in receipt of Spec Pay I can find (http://www.forces.gc.ca/assets/FORCES_Internet/docs/en/caf-community-pay/reg-force-res-force-class-c-spec-pay-table-12-sept-2019.pdf) does not include SF Op.
And I was not aware that the Assaulter MESIP had been implemented.
And I was not aware that the Assaulter MESIP had been implemented.
- Reaction score
- 213
- Points
- 880
dapaterson said:
You rarely do, so I think we can let this one slide. ;D
- Reaction score
- 4,923
- Points
- 1,160
dapaterson said:
A lot of people think that, and then they VOT to SF Op and realize they're being paid the same as a Signaller (sometimes less if that Signaller has Spec Pay). ACISS (or whatever we'll be next year) was to undergo a new pay review system that DPPD has developed, and I have a sneaking suspicion that SF Op and Assaulter will be first in line for pay reviews.
- Reaction score
- 4,923
- Points
- 1,160
Yikes what a soup sandwich. That would flip the tables where a reservist and reg force member injured on the same tour in the same way would get drastically different pensions.Teager said:
- Reaction score
- 28,761
- Points
- 1,090
Incorrect. The Logan lawsuit deals only with LTD payments. Pensions under the CFSA continue to be based on pay (per the CFSA and CFSR).
- Reaction score
- 213
- Points
- 880
I think what PuckChaser was getting at is that you could have two dudes/dudettes in the same section, both hit by the same IED with the same injuries, both medically released and can't work again. Yet they would have differing LTD payment amounts. Sounds like another lawsuit waiting to happen. The same standard should be applied across the board.
I'm hoping this works out equally for both injured Reg and Res pers. I don't think we've always done the best job of taking care of injured soldiers, but I suspect things have been worse for reservists specifically. Who gives a crap whether a soldier injured on deployment is from The RCR or The QOR. If they both did their jobs and paid a price, they should be properly cared for and compensated.
I'm hoping this works out equally for both injured Reg and Res pers. I don't think we've always done the best job of taking care of injured soldiers, but I suspect things have been worse for reservists specifically. Who gives a crap whether a soldier injured on deployment is from The RCR or The QOR. If they both did their jobs and paid a price, they should be properly cared for and compensated.
- Reaction score
- 28,761
- Points
- 1,090
Looking at the document properties, it was produced by the law firm (the document creator is someone identified as an admin assistant at the law firm). It's not a court document, and there is nothing in it to indicate one way or the other what approach the Crown intends to take; I have been unable to find anything in the press or on Government of Canada websites on whether or not the judge's decision will be appealed.
Teager
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 29
- Points
- 330
This lawsuit has now been settled. See below for more info.
wonder what that means going fwd, willThis lawsuit has now been settled. See below for more info.
the adjust SISIP CAF LTD or are they for real just renaming it to CAF LTD and gonna wait for another class action to settle it? Like folks who released after 31 Dec 2021…
Chargersfan
Member
- Reaction score
- 48
- Points
- 430
If the rumors are true about the PLD replacement, it’s a sizable pay bump. it will be an allowance which is treated and taxed as income. It better be factored into SISIP and VAC IRB or there will be another lawsuit coming their way very soon.,,,
Teager
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 29
- Points
- 330
Lawyers have stated that if you have more added to your monthly SISIP amount VAC will be recalculating amd clawing that amount back off your IRB. The lump sum amount will not be clawed back.
- Reaction score
- 28,761
- Points
- 1,090
Based on what grounds?
