Author Topic: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread  (Read 113003 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline battleaxe

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 107
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #25 on: October 05, 2007, 18:52:31 »
Sure, you can open 'competitions' to vets, but how many of those competitions for civ positions are filled even before the poster goes up?  A done deal.


We never hear about those competitions because the jobs are never posted.  If the transition to civilian was seamless- just a natural part of the release process- and personnel were put into jobs without a public posting and competition process (government employees need not apply for new positions in accommodation situations), Larrie and Suzie would never hear about the position and therefore wouldn't be able to gripe about not being able to apply for it.

No?

I get what you mean about the politics involved, though.

I am an admitted idealist and what I've written represents how things would be "if I were Queen of the world". Most people are quite indignant about the treatment of vets- right up until the moment they hear that the solution to the problem will affect their own lives.  You're right.

That's why I brought the union issue into the mix- people, especially people with union backing- will never let it happen.

So, how can our released personnel continue working and contributing- without stepping on the toes of civilian government workers and/or current deployable military personnel who need jobs to come home to in between tours?

It's impossible-someone's going to get their toes smushed.  If the system is not radically changed, our deployable personnel are going to, once again, find their downtime positions taken and the recruiting system clogged with non-deployable personnel. 

That didn't work...so what to do?

This time around, it has to be different.  We have tried accommodating personnel within the CF and the system got clogged up- promotions and recruiting were affected and downtime positions were taken away from deployable personnel.  It messed with the natural rotation of things.  This time, we have to go outside of the CF. There is no way to do that without conflict. Even if the injured are retained within the CF, and given a separate non-deployable status so that they don't get counted in CF staffing numbers, their mere presence will certainly begin to affect Public Service employment opportunities- and someone will complain.

I can't see a solution that pleases everyone, but I feel that military personnel have made enough concessions and paid a big enough price.  Let the public make a contribution to Canada's defence and reputation by acknowledging that, being at war, it is in our collective Canadian best interest to keep our experienced military personnel in the loop and in DND-in training, logistics, and advisory positions.

Let someone else step up and make the concessions this time.

Yeah, I know...I'm dreaming again.

It would be nice to see them pull out the 'we are at war' and 'national security' cards here, though. Don't these things override union demands and civilian workers' indignation? Isn't security a priority- and don't priorities come first? 

Dreamin'?

I'm off to check out the wiki thing that was mentioned above...

Bren


Offline simysmom99

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 147
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #26 on: October 05, 2007, 19:17:52 »
So here is where I see it, from someone who is living with a severely injured soldier. 
He is still working.  In fact, he is working more and away a lot more than he was before the injury.  His date for retirement is in 2009, which is his 10 year mark.  Does he want to continue?  I don't know.  I think he has earned the right to say "f*^& it" when retirement comes up and sit on his *** all day for the rest of his life.  This of course will  not happen because that is not the kind of person my dh is.
I completely understand the Universality of Service.  I see making sure that all of our deployable soldiers have jobs.  But what about making sure that those who have lost 2 legs (3 soldiers that I know of) and can't walk more than 1 km a day (which is like running a marathon, every day, day after day) have a position within the military that fulfills their need to be productive members of society.  We can't turn our backs on these soldiers either. 
I can't say 1 awful thing about how my dh has been treated by the military.  Sure, we have battles, but so does everyone else physically well or not.  We need to change our way of thinking and change policy.  The thing is is that we have to change an entire bureaucracy, which will take time and patience. 

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,594
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #27 on: October 05, 2007, 19:39:28 »
If a soldier can recover from his injuries,including loss of limbs and can pass the PT test should be allowed to stay on active duty.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/WNT/IraqCoverage/story?id=1747600&page=1

Offline bruce7711

  • Captains and Corporals...both have their uses
  • Member
  • ****
  • 3,960
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 227
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #28 on: October 06, 2007, 01:55:26 »
I am all for keeping wounded soldiers employes in DND.  If they have the drive and motivation to serve, then we as an army deserve them.  There are plenty of desk jobs that they would excel at.  Now, prying the present holders of those desks from their current job is another matter.  But it can be easily solved by the career managers.  And if those pers don't like the prospect of going back to a line unit, oh well, too bad.  My only concern is if the wounded soldiers stay on their home units nominal role or not.  This could impede the advancement of other soldiers.  At the end of the day, wounded soldiers are still soldiers, and if they wanna fight, lets give them the chance.  Same pay prospects, same promotion chances. They earn it like everyone else.  And that is, I beleive, how they would want it.

Offline retiredgrunt45

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,715
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 537
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #29 on: October 06, 2007, 02:08:47 »
I'm sorry but I don't agree with retaining personnel who have been injured, either in theatre or otherwise. The military needs fit capable people, not a bunch of wheelchair and cane commado's, especially at this time.

I was medically released and I must say that I'm glad I was, because having my career go down the tubes wasn't something I wanted to stick around to watch. Watching my peers advancing in rank, getting good postings and being able to do the "job" is something that played on me everyday and I was all to glad to leave, to make room for a healthy individual.

If this is implemented, these individuals will take up spots were otherwise healthy individuals could have been. Its a bad,bad idea and will have all kinds of negative implications further down the road.

The military is no place for physically challenged people and I'm speaking from first hand experience.  

Doing your thing for your country is admirable, getting injured while doing it sucks, but it's part of the job. Passing the flag to another to continue to the fight is hard, but we all have to be "realistic" and move on.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2007, 02:19:18 by retiredgrunt45 »
The first goal of any political party is to stay in power by whatever means possible. Their second goal is to fool us into believing that we should keep them in power.

A politician is like a used car saleman, he'll promise you a "peach" and then turn around and sell you a "lemon"

"Politicians are like diapers, they have to be changed often because their usually full of crap.

Offline the 48th regulator

    A mans gotta eat.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 47,200
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,966
  • Emancipate yourself from mental slavery.
    • Green Veterans Canada
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #30 on: October 06, 2007, 02:50:12 »
I'm sorry but I don't agree with retaining personnel who have been injured, either in theatre or otherwise. The military needs fit capable people, not a bunch of wheelchair and cane commado's, especially at this time.

I was medically released and I must say that I'm glad I was, because having my career go down the tubes wasn't something I wanted to stick around to watch. Watching my peers advancing in rank, getting good postings and being able to do the "job" is something that played on me everyday and I was all to glad to leave, to make room for a healthy individual.

If this is implemented, these individuals will take up spots were otherwise healthy individuals could have been. Its a bad,bad idea and will have all kinds of negative implications further down the road.

The military is no place for physically challenged people and I'm speaking from first hand experience. 

Doing your thing for your country is admirable, getting injured while doing it sucks, but it's part of the job. Passing the flag to another to continue to the fight is hard, but we all have to be "realistic" and move on.

So can I ask you one question,

You would not employ MCpl Paul Franklin to pass on his knowledge of Combat medicine, because he is a wheelchair bound, cane commando?

Interesting.

Please answer that one question.

dileas

tess
I know that I’m not perfect and that I don’t claim to be, so before you point your fingers make sure your hands are clean.

Offline battleaxe

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 107
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #31 on: October 06, 2007, 09:38:11 »
The conundrum is this...it's better to keep injured soldiers employed (both morally and from a human resources standpoint) but to do so causes no end of problems within the CF itself.

I recently wrote this in response to an e-mail I received from another medically released vet who, having managed to get into the PS, is still fighting to have his time in the CF counted towards seniority, vacation benefits, etc.  After years in the military- he started at the bottom again in the PS.  I'd say work needs to be done on the priority hire and transition into the PS (he's not the only one I know who has had this problem)- for those few who actually manage to do so.
 
"There needs to be a monumental shift in thinking. 

As a tax payer, I’m appalled at the experience, training, and money that the government tosses away each time a military member is released.  And, I feel that they are being released because it is easier to simply release them than to create new policies to employ them productively.  I also believe that changes in employment security for military members would jeopardize the employment of many other rehab, insurance, and VAC employees.

Veterans are big business- many people are employed in ‘rehabilitating’ people who require little or no rehabilitating. If we start giving employable (this is not about those who cannot work) released personnel jobs, who are they going to ‘rehabilitate’? What are they going to do?

Anyway, instead of making it seem like charity, turn it around. 

Currently, the system works like this: We hear, “OK soldier, you were hurt in battle and can’t run anymore.  We appreciate your time.  Here’s some money, and we’ll give you a little extra consideration (along with all the other special interest groups that have priority hire) if you want another job in the government. If you can’t find a government job, you’re on your own. Good luck.  Catch you later.”

I would like it to hear this, “OK soldier, you were hurt in battle and you can’t run anymore.  You may feel like you can’t be of any use to us anymore; but do you know what?  The Canadian taxpayers spent a lot of time, money, and effort training and educating you and you owe them-and you signed a contract that we are going to hold you to.  We are at war, we are under staffed, and we need your experience and expertise to train those who are willing to continue the fight that you started.  We are going to stop hiring fresh faced university students and civilians into the DND civilian division, and we are going to put you to work there.  Instead of creating a PS position for a civilian so that there will be somebody to help you find a job, we are simply going to find a job for you- a PS position that will enhance CF services for deployable military personnel and allow you, now a civilian, to constructively continue to support the CF. We are going to do this, because you have proven yourself a good and motivated worker, and we need you.  We appreciate what you did for us, soldier, but your work is not done.”


Treat people with dignity and acknowledge their worth and we will have fewer 'disgruntled' (I hate that word) veterans sounding off to the media.

Somebody above mentioned that we have to be realistic. 

Realistically, this is neither the same world nor the same job market/employment situation that existed twenty or thirty years ago. The "suck it up, you signed on the dotted line" argument is no longer valid. 

Recently, Canada's Labour Minister vowed to enact legislation that would protect reservists' employment-on a national level.

If this happens, the CF will find people investing time and effort in first finding and establishing stable permanent employment...and then joining the reserves to fulfill the need they have to fight for Canada. 

Then, if they are injured, or get sick, they will have a job to go back to- with an employer that will work with them and accommodate for their missing limbs and kidney stones. People will not invest in a career that will have them starting all over again years down the road if they happen to get arthritis or end up using a cane. And they will know the CF treats their wounded this way because, unlike twenty or thirty years ago, ex-military are speaking out at the unfairness- telling the world, on national television, how things are.

It's very noble to consider the military a calling, and to say that it's so much more than a job. It's very easy to get offended by being called a mere "employee"- until the paycheck stops.

I'm watching the MCpl Franklin situation with interest.  Here we have a man who has won the hearts and minds of nation, is motivated and has skills and experience that will help to save the lives of future soldiers.  Will they let him go?

Can they not create a position for this man?  Or will people be shouting-"You have to open that position up to a competition- because he's not in the military anymore?"

It's a shame...and so frustrating that I don't know what else to say right now.

Bren


Offline HFXCrow

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 751
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #32 on: October 06, 2007, 09:49:55 »
I think we should retain wounded members in such areas of recruiting or if applicable UTA to the reserves. Or even in Nat/Reg Intelligence Centers as they have valuable on the ground experience and can add a tactical spin to Command (Trinity/CFEWC/Athena etc)

These people are motivated, highly knowledgeable and demonstrates that the CF is a family and we do not discard our sick.

But I think it would have to be assessed on a case by case basis.

edit: Don't we accommodate people in postions anyway? (we do it in Navy)
« Last Edit: October 06, 2007, 10:03:26 by HFXCrow »
Enjoying the ride and doesn't want to get off

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 426,325
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,384
  • Crewman
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #33 on: October 06, 2007, 10:03:17 »
I think we should retain wounded members in such areas of recruiting or if applicable UTA to the reserves. Or even in Nat/Reg Intelligence Centers as they have valuable on the ground experience and can add a tactical spin to Command (Trinity/CFEWC/Athena etc)

These people are motivated, highly knowledeable and demonstrates that the CF is a family and we do not discard our sick.

But I think it would have to be assessed on a case by case basis.

Not to shoot you down, but most of what you just posted is not workable.  The places you have mentioned are mandated to augment the Regular Force, and must meet the requirements of being deployable.  Reservists are making up very large percentages of Rotos.  Reserve units need deployable pers.  Any Int position is in high demand, and to fill them with non-deployable pers would soon make them non-effective.  This requirement to deploy in actuality applies to some civilians serving in some DND positions.

You have made a very valid point in closing, and that is that it is necessary that these are all assessed on a case by case basis. 

People should not confuse the CF with DND in this discussion, as they are two separate entities.  To keep a disabled Service Member in the CF is not the same as keeping them in DND. 
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline TCBF

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 13,445
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,929
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #34 on: October 06, 2007, 10:14:54 »
- We may recall that the PS was jammed with WW2 vets, but so was every other place - WW2 created almost 1,000,000 Canadian veterans, plus most of the 600,000 WW1 vets were still alive and working in Aug 1945.

- As well, up into the eighties you could transfer your seniority and benefits to the PS. That was shot down. Lots of officers were retiring at 20 or 25 years and brought their seniority into the PS. Naturally, that prevented a lot of the lower PS from progressing. Since the vast majority of the retiring officers were male, it allegedly created the hated "glass ceiling" which prevented female PS members from advancing at/to the executive level.

- Ironic, in that parity with the CF and the PS was created in the sixties to allow direct transfer (some have bemoaned that event as the death rattle of military professionalism), then we get frozen out of direct transfers to the PS, yet we still have our pay and benefits package stapled to - and stifled by - that of the PS.

- If it comes to wounded vets in wheelchairs versus the Public Service Alliance of Canada, the smart money will bet on PSAC.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2007, 10:38:47 by TCBF »
"Disarming the Canadian public is part of the new humanitarian social agenda."   - Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axeworthy at a Gun Control conference in Oslo, Norway in 1998.


"I didn’t feel that it was an act of violence; you know, I felt that it was an act of liberation, that’s how I felt you know." - Ann Hansen, Canadian 'Urban Guerrilla'(one of the "Squamish Five")

Offline HFXCrow

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 751
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #35 on: October 06, 2007, 10:15:11 »
The reserves I can agree with you on. Or what about the CIC?

But I will tell you my situation on the intelligence side. I was working at a unit in Ottawa where we hired civilians to augment regular force members as time was lost to courses/training etc. The civilians were ex-members of the CF because of the experience and knowledge base requirements. Close your eyes and imagine Cubicle land.

My question is why not let injured CF personnel with the right aptitude, experience & motivation to do these kind of jobs. Data base entry, technical reports etc. vice public servants.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2007, 10:20:11 by HFXCrow »
Enjoying the ride and doesn't want to get off

Offline TCBF

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 13,445
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,929
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #36 on: October 06, 2007, 10:57:00 »
HFXCrow,

I think that -

The strength of the CF is arrived at through the process of the main estimates which form the basis of the federal budget.  This is one way the people - through their elected members - control the direction of government: through the application or denial of funding (in theory).

Thus, the CF cannot excede the strength (by rank and number) tabled in the main estimates (generally speaking).

For every non-deployable position we create, we lose a deployable one.  The first hint of this being a problem will be non-deployable people taking up "shore billets" formerly used as "a change is better than a rest" postings by deployable members.  Once we keep burning out the same people on deployments because the 'rest' postings are filled by non-deployable pers who cannot take their turns on tour, we start losing experienced and expensively trained soldiers to releases.

As well, the 'Succession Plans' of our regimental system dictate that certain positions must be accomplished as we hack and claw our way up the pyramid.  We have to leave those positions open to fit pers.
"Disarming the Canadian public is part of the new humanitarian social agenda."   - Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axeworthy at a Gun Control conference in Oslo, Norway in 1998.


"I didn’t feel that it was an act of violence; you know, I felt that it was an act of liberation, that’s how I felt you know." - Ann Hansen, Canadian 'Urban Guerrilla'(one of the "Squamish Five")

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 25,765
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,643
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #37 on: October 06, 2007, 11:48:59 »
Agreed.  Surely someone doesn't need to be in fighting trim to man a HQ desk, or many other, non-combat type positions.

Harris,  last thing people need to conclude is that all HQ positions are staffed by the Sick & lame.
Chimo!

Offline retiredgrunt45

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,715
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 537
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #38 on: October 06, 2007, 11:51:41 »
Quote
So can I ask you one question,

You would not employ MCpl Paul Franklin to pass on his knowledge of Combat medicine, because he is a wheelchair bound, cane commando?

Interesting.

Please answer that one question.

dileas

The answer is quite simple. I would have been one of those wheelchair commando's, since I'm in a wheelchair, I can attest to what I said in my original post as having first hand knowledge and I knew deep down that the military was no longer the place for me. Don't get me wrong it was hard leaving the only life I knew and I was angry, but I also realized that my military career was over. and that I would always be playing second fiddle to someone else. No advancement, static postings, medical reviews would have been only a few of the hurdles I would have had to face If I had been alowed to stay, not to mention holding up a spot for an able bodied person.
We must be realistic and realize that the military is unlike any other job, it depends on fit able bodied people to perform their duties and alowing injured disabled people to remain in the ranks will only lead to more serious implications down the road.
I stick with my conviction, that the military is no place for the disabled in uniform.

Quote
As to your question Tess about Mcpl Franklin, he could do the same thing as a civilian consultant employed by DND.

Me, I went back to school, recieved my computer science degree and now I work as an IT consultant for Kellogs Canada here in London Ontario.

I hope that answers your question.
The first goal of any political party is to stay in power by whatever means possible. Their second goal is to fool us into believing that we should keep them in power.

A politician is like a used car saleman, he'll promise you a "peach" and then turn around and sell you a "lemon"

"Politicians are like diapers, they have to be changed often because their usually full of crap.

Offline the 48th regulator

    A mans gotta eat.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 47,200
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,966
  • Emancipate yourself from mental slavery.
    • Green Veterans Canada
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #39 on: October 06, 2007, 11:54:06 »
The answer is quite simple. I would have been one of those wheelchair commando's, since I'm in a wheelchair, I can attest to what I said in my original post as having first hand knowledge and I knew deep down that the military was no longer the place for me. Don't get me wrong it was hard leaving the only life I knew and I was angry, but I also realized that my military career was over. and that I would always be playing second fiddle to someone else. No advancement, static postings, medical reviews would have been only a few of the hurdles I would have had to face If I had been alowed to stay, not to mention holding up a spot for an able bodied person.
We must be realistic and realize that the military is unlike any other job, it depends on fit able bodied people to perform their duties and alowing injured disabled people to remain in the ranks will only lead to more serious implications down the road.
I stick with my conviction, that the military is no place for the disabled in uniform.

As to your question Tess about Mcpl Franklin, he could do the same thing as a civilian consultant employed by DND.

Me, I went back to school, recieved my computer science degree and now I work as an IT consultant for Kellogs Canada here in London Ontario.

I hope that answers your question.

Too a Tee.

As opposed to your post last night, that conveys a better message.

That was all I asked for.

Cheers.


dileas

tess

I know that I’m not perfect and that I don’t claim to be, so before you point your fingers make sure your hands are clean.

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 25,765
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,643
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #40 on: October 06, 2007, 11:56:05 »
+1 RG45
Chimo!

Offline battleaxe

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 107
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #41 on: October 06, 2007, 12:00:18 »
I'm going to drop a big dumb question right here in the middle of this thing.

This is a "what if" hypothetical and I am not learned enough about unions and such to make a truly informed opinion yet but- in the spirit of learning and in order to add to the discussion about options, I'm going to throw this out there...

If it is found that military personnel have the right to the same benefits and considerations as other people in the government...
If military people have skills that are valuable, comparable, and transferrable to many public service positions...
If tax payers invest large amounts of money in soldiers' training and would logically benefit from the continued use of those skills...
If it has been acknowledged that military personnel and vets have the right to advocacy...
and if one were to consider military service the highest form of public service...

then, hypothetically, why not sign military personnel up as PS employees- and simply consider the CF another department within DND?

Don't get mad as a snap reaction...simply think about it.

First argument-CF personnel cannot be unionized.  Why not?  It is legislated.  Yes, and legislation is changed all the time. 
Unionization would undermine discipline in the CF?   Yes, but, let's face it, the days of mindless acceptance of poor treatment are long gone.  Forces personnel have any number of avenues to discuss, negotiate, and resolve their issues. There are already forms of advocacy- and people are screaming for more.  Greivances, the CF Ombudsman, the Human Rights Commission, the media- and all of those are currently backfilled with complaints. What difference, really, will belonging to a union make in how the military runs today- other than the fact that they would have to pay the dues? (This is not a hypothetical question but a real one- would unionization really make a big difference? Maybe another thread? (I'm going now to the search function to see if this has been discussed on this forum before)

Second argument-Union resistance.  Yes.
Third argument...you tell me...

I've admitted to idealism, but am not idealistic to the point of stupidity...and that is why I present this as a hypothetical rather than a concrete suggestion. I also realize the violent visceral reaction that many must feel upon simply considering the option. 

But consider it, please. If one can get past the drama, the legislation and the politics, all of those "it'll never work because" scenarios...would it be a viable option?

It would put military personnel on equal footing with other government employees- from the start- and would open up the door to moving them out of the CF when they cannot deploy and into other govenment employment.

Is unionism the only thing preventing military personnel being signed on as public servants? If yes,  is that rationale even a valid one, in the modern sense?


Bren  (who asks that you all respond to this question guided by the spirit of the saying 'there are no stupid questions"-Thanks)

Offline retiredgrunt45

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 2,715
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 537
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #42 on: October 06, 2007, 12:02:03 »
Sorry Tess, I re-read my post last night and I seen were someone would get the wrong idea. My apologies.
The first goal of any political party is to stay in power by whatever means possible. Their second goal is to fool us into believing that we should keep them in power.

A politician is like a used car saleman, he'll promise you a "peach" and then turn around and sell you a "lemon"

"Politicians are like diapers, they have to be changed often because their usually full of crap.

Offline TCBF

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 13,445
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,929
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #43 on: October 06, 2007, 12:40:59 »
then, hypothetically, why not sign military personnel up as PS employees- and simply consider the CF another department within DND?

- Asked and Answered.

First argument-CF personnel cannot be unionized.  Why not?  It is legislated.  Yes, and legislation is changed all the time. 
Unionization would undermine discipline in the CF?   Yes, but, let's face it, the days of mindless acceptance of poor treatment are long gone.  Forces personnel have any number of avenues to discuss, negotiate, and resolve their issues. There are already forms of advocacy- and people are screaming for more.  Greivances, the CF Ombudsman, the Human Rights Commission, the media- and all of those are currently backfilled with complaints. What difference, really, will belonging to a union make in how the military runs today- other than the fact that they would have to pay the dues? (This is not a hypothetical question but a real one- would unionization really make a big difference? Maybe another thread? (I'm going now to the search function to see if this has been discussed on this forum before)

- Bren, more forms of advocacy actually water down and delay positive results.  When everyone is responsible, NO ONE is responsible (Ahhhhhh, the joys of socialism!)  It merely employs more well paid bureaucrats to less result.

Second argument-Union resistance.  Yes. ... Is unionism the only thing preventing military personnel being signed on as public servants? If yes,  is that rationale even a valid one, in the modern sense?

- Valid? All power is validation.  Even after WW2, not all of the jobs being 'held' for soldiers were held. As I said above, if it comes to vets in wheelchairs versus PSAC, smart money is on PSAC.

- I am not picking on PSAC either.  Try getting school boards to give preferential hiring to vets who go through teacher's colledge/university.  Then wait for the footage of protesting teachers beating vets in wheelchairs with their picket signs "NO JOBS FOR BABY KILLERS!"  "HELP US KEEP CRAZED SOLDIERS FROM YOUR CHILDREN!"


"Disarming the Canadian public is part of the new humanitarian social agenda."   - Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axeworthy at a Gun Control conference in Oslo, Norway in 1998.


"I didn’t feel that it was an act of violence; you know, I felt that it was an act of liberation, that’s how I felt you know." - Ann Hansen, Canadian 'Urban Guerrilla'(one of the "Squamish Five")

Offline Sheep Dog AT

  • The Fly in Someone's Ointment - Giggity
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 57,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,198
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #44 on: October 06, 2007, 12:58:38 »
If you can't deploy you should not be retained if you can't get better.  That includes those too out of shape, injured, not willing to deploy etc.  If these wounded personnel have experience to pass on then hire them as consultants.  Now that doesn't mean every chance to get better should be given but I think the current medical release is good with 2 years paid school including 75% of your wage and paying for you books and tools etc.  There is also the 2x 6 month temp categories and a permanent category so its not as if the member has to be released straight away and not have time to converse with his buddies.
Apparently infamous for his one liners.
Oh Giggity Well...........Giggity

Offline battleaxe

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 107
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #45 on: October 06, 2007, 15:13:05 »
- Asked and Answered.

Do you have a link to a discussion that doesn't list the unions or current legislation (both of which seem to be tired old excuses) as the over riding reasons for why CF personnel are not part of the PS?  I can't find one.

I believe that the union argument may have lost some of its relevance along the way, and I believe that legislation is a dynamic thing that changes-albeit slowly- with the times.
I guess I am asking if union reasons and legslative roadblocks are the only things preventing military personnel being considered public servants. Are there any other reasons?

- Bren, more forms of advocacy actually water down and delay positive results.  When everyone is responsible, NO ONE is responsible (Ahhhhhh, the joys of socialism!)  It merely employs more well paid bureaucrats to less result.

I hate the bureacracy involved in advocacy, too.  I think if things were simply done right the first time, there would be no need for it. Now, however, we have watchdogs guarding the watchdogs who are watching the advocates.  Terrible.

- Valid? All power is validation.  Even after WW2, not all of the jobs being 'held' for soldiers were held. As I said above, if it comes to vets in wheelchairs versus PSAC, smart money is on PSAC.

I'm not sure I understand. I don't want to put words in your mouth or misunderstand so...by this do you mean that you think the union is powerful enough to stop any proposal to include military personnel in the PS?  That the resistance presented by unions would come from the unions themselves rather than from any disciplinary issues that might arise as a result of having a unionized military?

I just want to be clear. Thanks.

Bren

Offline battleaxe

  • Member
  • ****
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 107
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #46 on: October 06, 2007, 15:34:41 »
If you can't deploy you should not be retained if you can't get better.  That includes those too out of shape, injured, not willing to deploy etc.  If these wounded personnel have experience to pass on then hire them as consultants.  Now that doesn't mean every chance to get better should be given but I think the current medical release is good with 2 years paid school including 75% of your wage and paying for you books and tools etc.  There is also the 2x 6 month temp categories and a permanent category so its not as if the member has to be released straight away and not have time to converse with his buddies.

I think the backtracking on this issue- the reversal in thinking that has Hillier counting on his "brightest minds" to figure a way out of the current mess of things- shows that current release benefits and handouts aren't working.  I think that it is becoming apparent that people are more concerned with employment, fairness and dignity than they are about the money and handouts given them upon release.

Bren

Offline Sheep Dog AT

  • The Fly in Someone's Ointment - Giggity
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 57,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,198
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #47 on: October 06, 2007, 16:41:28 »
I wouldn't call the program a handout but an attempt to allow the person a chance to find a new career that he or she is physically capable of doing.  Releasing someone who can't deploy shouldn't be unfair or indignant.   To be clear that is how I understand a medical release to work and my understanding my be different from what is actual.
Apparently infamous for his one liners.
Oh Giggity Well...........Giggity

Offline bruce7711

  • Captains and Corporals...both have their uses
  • Member
  • ****
  • 3,960
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 227
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #48 on: October 19, 2007, 20:22:52 »
There is alot of talk in this thread about the ways or lack of ways to retain wounded soldiers from Afghanistan.  Pretty much it has all been about physical injuries, ie, loss of limbs, etc.  What about mental injuries?  There are plenty of those within the CF that can't deploy, go on exercise, have to do half days, etc.  Why not release them as well?

Offline TCBF

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 13,445
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,929
Re: Keeping wounded in CF - merged super-thread
« Reply #49 on: October 19, 2007, 20:28:08 »
- A lot are released eventually.  We don't hear about it unless they drive their SUV through the front entrance of the base headquarters building at Steele Barracks.
"Disarming the Canadian public is part of the new humanitarian social agenda."   - Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axeworthy at a Gun Control conference in Oslo, Norway in 1998.


"I didn’t feel that it was an act of violence; you know, I felt that it was an act of liberation, that’s how I felt you know." - Ann Hansen, Canadian 'Urban Guerrilla'(one of the "Squamish Five")