Why we pay Reservists what we do (Including Reg v.s. Cl B v.s. Cl C pay, and Double-Dippin')

[aesop081]

Keep in mind, the Class A must have a valid reason for not showing up if it is a mandatory training.

And a class B guy needs a good reason not to attend anything, maditory or not.

Seems fair, too bad something like this wasn't offered to reg force members at their own bases.

Its like that where i work

 

[ark]

So why are you still arguing ?

I was arguing other points.

 

[Dissident]

I have still yet to meet an A Class pers who was "reqd/ordered" to work even 4 days per week <--- they can say "no, I'm A Class". But, I know some B Class pers who are ordered to work ... even after having already put in a good 12 hours that day ... or a good 60 hours that week (and that's exactly why they get that "free pay" for those 2 days).

Actually, a unit that shall remain nameless, hired two class A pers for 3 days a week to fill in a full time clerks position. Equal or more work, for less pay.

 

[Yrys]

Seems to me that "push" is a demonstrated need.  By all means, prohibit the Res from going on tours.  Hope your Reg buddies on their seventh tour to Afghanistan thank you appropriately. 

... or longer time away from love ones!


'Not ruling out' longer Afghanistan rotations for Canadian soldiers: MacKay

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan - Canada's defence minister is not ruling out the possibility of longer rotations for Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan.

Peter MacKay is on his way back to Canada after a three-day visit to Kandahar province, during which he toured a road construction project and a local field hospital.
He says it's up to the Canadian Forces to decide whether troops should be in Afghanistan for more than six months at a stretch. MacKay says Canada is focused on
training Afghan soldiers and police so they can handle security once coalition forces leave. He says recruiting efforts are continuing in Canada as well. MacKay says
the 2011 timeline for Canada's Afghan mission will make it easier to decide how many boots on the ground Canada will need.

 

[aesop081]

Actually, a unit that shall remain nameless, hired two class A pers for 3 days a week to fill in a full time clerks position. Equal or more work, for less pay.

If they were serving on Class A.....it is NOT equal work as their terms of service are different from a member on class B/c or a RegF member. The job while sitting at the desk may be the same but the liabilities of their contract is not.

 

[WLSC]

The problem wont be solve here.  Administrativelly, there is certainly a difference but all I can read here his that there his so much more to do on both side.  All we are asking his that our contribution his fully acknoleged.  Wich his not.  An action will always be less good when it's done by a reservist.  Maybe, you wont see it like that but, it's the way we perceive it.  Perception his not all but a lot of it.

 

[aesop081]

  All we are asking his that our contribution his fully acknoleged.  Wich his not. 

Oh please enlighten me........

This thread has been about pay. Now you are talking about actions. 2 separate issues.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

All we are asking his that our contribution his fully acknoleged.  Wich his not.  An action will always be less good when it's done by a reservist.  Maybe, you wont see it like that but, it's the way we perceive it.  Perception his not all but a lot of it.

Guh.  That will be good for another 180+ posts in less than 24 hrs 
Make deployment a criteria for promotion in the Res.  That should square away the dead wood and provide a steady stream of pulses to show up as needed.  At such time as we are deployed or in training for it, we are making the full cash. 

 

[kratz]

Actually, a unit that shall remain nameless, hired two class A pers for 3 days a week to fill in a full time clerks position. Equal or more work, for less pay.

Reading CMP Instruction 20-04, the intent of this instruction was to cease such examples that DL gave and to prove  Vern's point WRT units deliberately employing members in class A positions and performing class B duties, without the pay and benefits.

 

[geo]

Class A pay and Class B pay still differs ...

Noooo... I really mean that there was a different pay rate between A & B for the same rank & same IPC.
Pte Pay level C class A would be pais 6.40$ per day
Pte pay level C class B would be paid 7.10$ per day

IIRC there was a difference thru to +/- 1980

 

[ark]

Actually, a unit that shall remain nameless, hired two class A pers for 3 days a week to fill in a full time clerks position. Equal or more work, for less pay.

It is not always a bad thing. Units always have to deal with limited ressources and sometime may want to spread them to as many people as possible. By taking two Class A members, they can split the money to more people instead of having a single one siphoning everything. At the same time the unit saves money on the two extra weekend pay days which can be also used to create extra Class A for someone else.

 

[geo]

Yup, as I stated, that choice explains in part the pay difference. Keep in mind, the Class A must have a valid reason for not showing up if it is a mandatory training.

Ohhh... some of those reasons are really quite weak.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

Ohhh... some of those reasons are really quite weak.

Yeah like,

I'm laying down carpet this weekend

 

[OldSolduer]

I agree with zipperhead_cop.....make an operational deployment mandatory.

 

[geo]

Yeah like,

I'm laying down carpet this weekend

Err - can't you get your 9D to deal with it?  >

 

[WLSC]

zipperhead_cop Today at 14:50:27
Make deployment a criteria for promotion in the Res.  That should square away the dead wood and provide a steady stream of pulses to show up as needed.

That's his not our call, that the goverment call but the training we do in our unit his training.  Maybe not as big then regF unit, off coure but still valuable training.  As for the cleaning his concern, it's a fight for each unit.  But on that basis, it would help.

 

[the 48th regulator]

I agree with zipperhead_cop.....make an operational deployment mandatory.

As long as the goverment lawfully enforces total job security, I would agree.

dileas

tess

 

[geo]

I agree with zipperhead_cop.....make an operational deployment mandatory.

Umm.... If a person has made himself available for a 3 year contract then yes, I agree that he should be "fair game" for a mandatory deployment if he is needed.

 

[ark]

Ohhh... some of those reasons are really quite weak.

Hah, yeah I know, but in theory they should be solid.

 

[OldSolduer]

I'm Class A and I want to deploy.....what are the ramifications, pay wise and pension wise....