Up to 1,500 military housing units sit empty, auditor general says

[dapaterson]

As a responsible adult capable of making my own decisions, I wouldn't normally decide to move to a place like Victoria on 48K. Likewise I wouldn't sink money into a property and then sell it in 4-7 years to take a loss. We have the unfortunate circumstances of being told where and when to move and for a lot of people (myself included) PMQs allow the flexibility to keep QOL depending on where we are told we're going to live for the next few years.

If only we had some method for paying people extra due to the differential costs of living at different posts.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

If only we had some method for paying people extra due to the differential costs of living at different posts.

Ah yes, PLD. Those rates are still set from the 2009 assessment. Pay policies move at a glacial pace as opposed to the volatility of inflation and home equity. Such as Cold Lake going from boom to recession within the 7 years people have been hounding Ottawa to change the rates.

 

[Halifax Tar]

CANEX loses money, deters competiton because of those subsidies, and serves no military utility.  It costs PILT; it costs infrastructure investments that could be made elsewhere.

And since the profits are an accounting fiction, it's just consuming O&M that could be used to pay for sea days, field training days, or days in 4 star hotels (depending on your environment).

Again: Why does DND/CAF need to run a third rate chain of retail stores?


(EDIT: fixing the inevitable typos that occur when posting before coffee)

I am sorry, this is all I could muster...  :facepalm:

Carry on with your stance, it is a free country after all.

 

[dapaterson]

I am willing to be persuaded. Why does the CAF need to run a retail chain? How does it contribute to core CAF missions and tasks?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

As for paid parking: Why are you so special that you deserve free parking, where other workers do not?

Because my tax dollars 'paid' for the parking lot in the first place??  What next, I have to pay rent on my workstation and chair in the crew room??

Taxpayers PAID for the parking lot already.  Its' not a private lot and shouldn't be able to collect revenues by users [taxpayers]?

Upkeep?  Part of doing business for the government.  Just like a 7/11.  They don't charge customers a 'parking fee' on top of their purchases, right?  Because that upkeep is part of their expense of operating.

 

[dapaterson]

Because my tax dollars 'paid' for the parking lot in the first place??  What next, I have to pay rent on my workstation and chair in the crew room??

You have choices about how to get to work.  Those choices vary on the location you are posted to.  And in remote / rural areas, there is still free parking.  For duty/shift workers whose hours prevent them from other means of transport, there is free parking.  But in major urban areas, you can drive, bike, walk, take public transit... you are not obliged to drive.  You choose to do so.  Up to what point should your choices be subsidized?

Taxpayers PAID for the parking lot already.  Its' not a private lot and shouldn't be able to collect revenues by users [taxpayers]?

And so? Government shouldn't be frugal with money?  Shouldn't try to recover costs from users of its services?

Upkeep?  Part of doing business for the government.  Just like a 7/11.  They don't charge customers a 'parking fee' on top of their purchases, right?  Because that upkeep is part of their expense of operating.

I'm beginning to think that Mike Duffy had nothing on CAF members...

 

[Eye In The Sky]

If only we had some method for paying people extra due to the differential costs of living at different posts.

Not exactly a fair and perfect system;  posted to Halifax?  631/month.  Posted to Greenwood next?  No PLD, likely higher property taxes, etc.  Take a look at the geo boundary of Halifax (NW boundary) and Greenwoods SE boundary.  Not much difference.  Having done both of those ones before with mortgages, I will say that the "but housing in HRM is more expensive" is a bit of a farce.

Closing out PMQs in a place like Gagetown would just make the price of buying/renting around there to go FULL RETARD, IMO.  Then what choice would the 48k/year Pte who wants to start a family have?

 

[Halifax Tar]

I am willing to be persuaded. Why does the CAF need to run a retail chain? How does it contribute to core CAF missions and tasks?

No dpaterson you are not.  I have been on this forum long enough to know that you are entrenched in your views like bedrock.  It does not warrant my time and effort to try to convince you otherwise. 

Please continue your stance, I just hope to god you are never in a position to actually swing decisions around these subjects. 

 

[dapaterson]

Closing out PMQs in a place like Gagetown would just make the price of buying/renting around there to go FULL RETARD, IMO.  Then what choice would the 48k/year Pte who wants to start a family have?

And you'll notice that I've never called to divest those Qs - my focus has been on urban areas where there's a viable rental market.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

You have choices about how to get to work.  Those choices vary on the location you are posted to.  And in remote / rural areas, there is still free parking.  For duty/shift workers whose hours prevent them from other means of transport, there is free parking.  But in major urban areas, you can drive, bike, walk, take public transit... you are not obliged to drive.  You choose to do so.  Up to what point should your choices be subsidized?

And so? Government shouldn't be frugal with money?  Shouldn't try to recover costs from users of its services?

I'm beginning to think that Mike Duffy had nothing on CAF members...

A person who lives in say, Hammonds Plains, because they can afford it out that far, and works on the dockyard has what options exactly? 

But what of the point I made; tax dollars paid for the parking lot.  It would be like the company that built my house charging me to park on the driveway I've already paid for.  "The government" paid for the parking lot with...ta da!  tax dollars.  From tax payers.  And then is charging them to use the thing they already paid for.  I see THAT as 'double dipping' off CAF members who are also tax payers.

Why not charge CAF members $5/day for the use of computers, desks and chairs then? Want to print that email?  That's 10 cents a page, sir.  Just sign this AR, we can have it come right off your pay.  I know, I know the tax payers, aka "you" already paid for this but...

 

[dapaterson]

No dpaterson you are not.  I have been on this forum long enough to know that you are entrenched in your views like bedrock.  It does not warrant my time and effort to try to convince you otherwise. 

Please continue your stance, I just hope to god you are never in a position to actually swing decisions around these subjects.

We will agree to disagree then.

 

[dapaterson]

But what of the point I made; tax dollars paid for the parking lot.  It would be like the company that built my house charging me to park on the driveway I've already paid for.  "The government" paid for the parking lot with...ta da!  tax dollars.  From tax payers.  And then is charging them to use the thing they already paid for. 

Why not charge CAF members $5/day for the use of computers, desks and chairs then? Want to print that email?  That's 10 cents a page, sir.  Just sign this AR, we can have it come right off your pay.  I know, I know the tax payers, aka "you" already paid for this but...

And tax payers will pay to repave the parking lot.  And to light the parking lot.  And plow it in the winter. And... and... and... So at what point do you as a taxpayer ask "Why am I still shelling out for this?"


Free parking is not an integral requirement for you to do your job.  Computers, desks, chairs etc are.  (Well, depends on your specific job).

 

[Jarnhamar]

CF members who live in PMQs have shit wrong with them that doesn't get fixed for months (if at all) and would in all likelihood result in lawsuits had they be renting from actual civilian landlords.

The chain of command needs to be removed from the equation as well.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

And you'll notice that I've never called to divest those Qs - my focus has been on urban areas where there's a viable rental market.

Like Edmonton?  Halifax?  Rental prices went FULL RETARD close to the dockyard area after the ship building deal was announced, from what I heard.  My last "viable" rental in Halifax [which was past the Hfx Airport] was more $ then my mortgage and property taxes are now.  And I still had a 45 min commute. 

Things that look nice and tidy in theory aren't quite so 'perfect' in reality.  :2c:

 

[Eye In The Sky]

And tax payers will pay to repave the parking lot.  And to light the parking lot.  And plow it in the winter. And... and... and... So at what point do you as a taxpayer ask "Why am I still shelling out for this?"

They/we have to pay for it in the 'non urban' places.  Are they upset about that?  I have more wasteful things I get pissed off about as a tax payer than parking lots, because I think it is pretty generally accepted the average person travels to work in a car.  I don't think Walmart charges its employees 'fees' to park their cars at work, because that would make them look like cheap assholes.  Its part of doing the business they do.  And they also repave, plow and light their parking lots.  Yet, I don't seem to recall seeing a 'parking fee' on my receipt when I run in for shaving cream and razors...odd.

Free parking is not an integral requirement for you to do your job.  Computers, desks, chairs etc are.  (Well, depends on your specific job).

That is pretty lame reasoning.  :  Refer to my Walmart example above.

I see more and more of the 'screw the CAF member' attitude from within the CAF than I have before.  I also see more of a lower GAFF from the average CAF member than I have before too.  "Service before self" is the job, but people stop giving a shit when they start to feel no one gives a shit about them and their welfare too. 

For the record, I am not in a PLDA, I don't rent a Q and I am not required to pay for parking.  I have no personal iron in this fire, but I know we are constantly lowering the bar for the majority of our CAF members;  the Pte's and Cpl's who are in Standard pay groups, the younger OCdts, etc. 

I still remember being in 'that' part of my life, trying to make ends meet and get ahead in life.  :2c:

 

[jollyjacktar]

Sell off the portfolio.  Let private industry run it.  They have experience in doing it; we do not.  Again: why should DND/CAF be a third rate residential landlord?

OK, we sell them off.  Who are you going to let in, especially where the PMQ are within the confines of the base proper ie: Borden?  Or are you going to now have the said same service family being screwed by a different landlord.  How's that for progress or looking after the welfare of the troops?

In some respects selling them off would be great if they were sold at fair market value with the proceeds going back to DND/CF, but it doesn't and it won't.  Jericho Beach PMQ did not sell at FMV which is a shame as it was very attractive waterfront property.  Same will go for Shannon Park.


If prices are so terrible, why not rent elsewhere?  In remote locations, that may not be an option (and would be a sensible place to keep quarters).  But HRM has a viable rental market.  Kingston has a viable rental market.

HRM had divested itself of many many PMQ in my 21+ years there.  Renting on the economy was not an option when I was posted to Shearwater in 94, it was the only choice in my case.  And yes, the prices are so terrible.  That's one reason why there are so many empty units here and there.

As for paid parking: Why are you so special that you deserve free parking, where other workers do not?

So, it's not OK for DND to be a landlord but it's OK for them to be in the parking lot business?  Why should some pay for parking where others do not?  Are we not all equal?  Why should it cost more for serviceperson A to work at this locale than serviceperson B of equal rank etc at another?

 

[MAJONES]

You have choices about how to get to work.  Those choices vary on the location you are posted to.  And in remote / rural areas, there is still free parking.  For duty/shift workers whose hours prevent them from other means of transport, there is free parking.  But in major urban areas, you can drive, bike, walk, take public transit... you are not obliged to drive.  You choose to do so.  Up to what point should your choices be subsidized?

And so? Government shouldn't be frugal with money?  Shouldn't try to recover costs from users of its services?

I'm beginning to think that Mike Duffy had nothing on CAF members...

Dapaterson:

You seem to be under the impression that being in the CAF is like any other job.  It is not.  The CAF asks its members to do things and make sacrifices that other employers just don't.  This is a tremendous impediment to recruiting and it shows in number of red trades that we have.  I can attest from personal experience that many qualified potential candidates, (esp for the technical trades), are dissuaded from enrolling by the life styles that the organization forces on them.  Generally, someone who is smart enough to qualify for these trades has other options open to them.  Very few of these potential candidates are willing to subject themselves to the lifestyle the CAF imposes.  Insisting that they pay market rates for PMQs, (which for the most part are horrid), while living someplace not of their choosing and depriving their spouse of employment does not tip the balance in the CAFs favour.  So, you impact on core capabilities is right their in front of you; look at every trade that is red.

Also; if you really think that CAF pers are comparable to Mike Duffy you should get out; You obviously have much to low an opinion of your fellow members for a healthy, trusting working relationship.

 

[dapaterson]

Dapaterson:

You seem to be under the impression that being in the CAF is like any other job.  It is not.  The CAF asks its members to do things and make sacrifices that other employers just don't.  This is a tremendous impediment to recruiting and it shows in number of red trades that we have.  I can attest from personal experience that many qualified potential candidates, (esp for the technical trades), are dissuaded from enrolling by the life styles that the organization forces on them.  Generally, someone who is smart enough to qualify for these trades has other options open to them.  Very few of these potential candidates are willing to subject themselves to the lifestyle the CAF imposes.  Insisting that they pay market rates for PMQs, (which for the most part are horrid), while living someplace not of their choosing and depriving their spouse of employment does not tip the balance in the CAFs favour.  So, you impact on core capabilities is right their in front of you; look at every trade that is red.

To recap: housing provided by the CAF is horrid.  I propose the CAF get out of the business of providing horrid housing wherever feasible.  Where's the issue?

Also; if you really think that CAF pers are comparable to Mike Duffy you should get out; You obviously have much to low an opinion of your fellow members for a healthy, trusting working relationship.

I should have used David Dingwall instead; I'm not alleging misrepresentation.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

To recap: housing provided by the CAF is horrid.  I propose the CAF get out of the business of providing horrid housing wherever feasible.  Where's the issue?

I think the change that should happen is the rental pricing of PMQs be made to reflect 'actual' value not fair market value.  What is the fair market value of a PMQ built in 1950 from aircraft component shipping containers?  $1100/month, really? 

The "who gets a PMQ' criteria is also in need of review.  Priority SHOULD be based on things like (1) posting duration (2) single/dual income household (3) rank/pay level.

"First come first serve" appears fair, but is it really?  Should a IPC 10 Capt Pilot in Shearwater who is getting PLD, SDA and AIRCRA get a PMQ over a Pte?  The 'sense of fair' part of me says "no".

PMQs have been around longer than I have;  I lived in them as a kid and as an adult.  Personally, I decided I would pay a mortgage and own my own home vice do the PMQ thing again.  BUT...I was able to get a mortgage.  Not every Pte and Cpl can qualify.  A PMQ can be a nice starting point; own home, own yard, grass to cut and a yard for the dog and kid(s) to play in. 

How about running it as a cost-neutral entity, vice the 'fair market value' crap which every knows is just that; crap.

Remember, not everyone is in a position to live on the economy as comfortably as others.  $48k income in a place like Halifax doesn't go very far.  Especially if you have to pay for a family car, that you can't afford to pay to park at your place of work, which forces you to now pay for a bus pass on top of your car insurance and monthly payment/lease.

Is it a mess?  I think so.  Is the best answer necessarily the easy one (hand this mess off to someone else!)?  No.

Whatever decision is made will affect 15-20% of CAF members and their QOL.  We've seen benefits eroded and erased over the past several years.  Is this next?

 

[dapaterson]

I agree that we need a military accommodation strategy that integrates the points you raise (and probably others, such as PLD).  And I see fixing the PMQ price issue best addressed by having someone else do that work.  Bureaucrats and magic formulas from thousands of kilometres away don't work.  Local ownership knows the local market and will say "These houses have bedrooms so small even Gary Coleman would say no, so we'll price them at a discount".