• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Army Reserve Restructuring

"enough" is a very subjective issue.

Absolutely. I can also tell you what we offer now is not enough.

I beg to differ.

Ok. You might get them in with cool toys and explosions but money will keep them coming back.

Time is money my friend.

Show Me The Money GIF


That's a different issue than the two above. I disagree with how you frame the issue but agree entirely with the fact that more could be and should be done. Canada, like other countries, stood up a VA system at the end of the two world wars that were more or less suitable for the times. It no longer is for two reasons - people expect more from the system and the ready availability of social communications makes failings in the system instant and wide spread news. It simply boggles my mind how a no-talent, low-life like Trudeau could get away with a phrase like "Why are we still fighting certain veterans groups in court? Because they're asking for more than we are able to give right now."

Do people want more ? Or did we, as Canadians, lower what we are willing to offer ? Thy name is New Veterans Charter.

Frame it how ever you like, I'm just calling a spade a spade. We do not look after our injured well enough period. And you can not expect unlimited liability from someone if you wont offer them unlimited care.
 
Class A pay should be 40% higher (daily rate) than class B.
That's an interesting thought that I could get on board for. Is there a history of that ever being floated?
Time is money my friend.

Show Me The Money GIF
Not everyone is a star wide receiver.
Do people want more ? Or did we, as Canadians, lower what we are willing to offer ? Thy name is New Veterans Charter.
Boy. That brings back some traumatic memories. I was still on Chief of Reserves Council at that time and that certainly brought up some bitter language, especially from us experienced in dealing with various auto insurance programs (like Manitoba's Autopac) and their callous "meat tables." To put it mildly, most of us were vehemently opposed to what was going on but the folks holding the purse strings thought it was just a splendid idea to get rid of open-ended systems as much as possible.
Frame it how ever you like, I'm just calling a spade a spade. We do not look after our injured well enough period. And you can not expect unlimited liability from someone if you wont offer them unlimited care.
I couldn't agree more. To me "unlimited care" includes ongoing lifestyle support beyond mere institutional care. It should include housing assistance, medical and social assistance, and a life-time earning differential appropriate to their level of disability to name a few. If we could afford 30% more civil servants we could afford this - for a bonus for the bean counters, it would go towards the NATO 2% standard.

🍻
 
I remember a buddy got 4 of his teeth knocked in on course by tripping and falling into the tailgate of a truck.

Military refused to pay for it, argued that his teeth were already a bit messed up previously and therefore he had to pay out of pocket 100% for the new fake teeth, as though they weren’t knocked out in service.

Poor guy was a college student doing the Reserves. He didn’t have money, thats why he was away on course. Ended up costing him more money in dental than he made on the course.

I don't know what era that occured but at one time the "quantity" of dental service provided to Reg Force was also limited. I was reminded a few weeks ago when I chanced upon seeing someone in TV news coverage who I did phase training (Reg Force) with in Gagetown forty years ago. He is now the deputy chief of a police service, but before I recognized him, I was struck by the perfection of his teeth as he spoke during the press briefing. Back then, before we tied onions to our belts, I recall him getting very agitated about the refusal of the Gagetown Dental Det CO (a LCol) to do certain work because it was considered "cosmetic". To be honest, "some" of the work would have had a cosmetic outcome (his smile, back then, was so bad that it would make a 1940's Cockney street sweeper look like a Hollywood film star in comparison), but he was within the criteria of "free from pain and able to eat".

I was also refused certain service by the same dentist (I had a darkened tooth, the result of some 'mouth trauma' a decade earlier), with the same explanation of 'cosmetic'. Several years following, when I was in Germany, our unit dentist did the work (a crown). By coincidence, on the day I went in for the final fitting, my dentist (a Maj) was unexpectedly away so the CO filled in, it was the same LCol who had told me in Gagetown that I was not entitled to have that work done. Not only did he make a point of telling me that I was still not entitled, but he showed me his notation on my dental records of the previous refusal in Gagetown.

As I understand it, the CF dental spectrum of care is now tied to a dollar amount similar to a normal dental insurance plan.
 
Non class C Res F pay rates are determined by multiplying monthly Reg F rates by 12, dividing by 365, then multiplying by 92.8%.

However, that is a calendar day rate, not a working day rate. Assuming five working days is the equivalent of seven calendar days, the class A rate should be 40% higher.

Alternatively, look at the leave cash out calculation and see that they convert leave days from working days to calendar days; the precedent is set.
 
I don't know what era that occured but at one time the "quantity" of dental service provided to Reg Force was also limited. I was reminded a few weeks ago when I chanced upon seeing someone in TV news coverage who I did phase training (Reg Force) with in Gagetown forty years ago. He is now the deputy chief of a police service, but before I recognized him, I was struck by the perfection of his teeth as he spoke during the press briefing. Back then, before we tied onions to our belts, I recall him getting very agitated about the refusal of the Gagetown Dental Det CO (a LCol) to do certain work because it was considered "cosmetic". To be honest, "some" of the work would have had a cosmetic outcome (his smile, back then, was so bad that it would make a 1940's Cockney street sweeper look like a Hollywood film star in comparison), but he was within the criteria of "free from pain and able to eat".

I was also refused certain service by the same dentist (I had a darkened tooth, the result of some 'mouth trauma' a decade earlier), with the same explanation of 'cosmetic'. Several years following, when I was in Germany, our unit dentist did the work (a crown). By coincidence, on the day I went in for the final fitting, my dentist (a Maj) was unexpectedly away so the CO filled in, it was the same LCol who had told me in Gagetown that I was not entitled to have that work done. Not only did he make a point of telling me that I was still not entitled, but he showed me his notation on my dental records of the previous refusal in Gagetown.

As I understand it, the CF dental spectrum of care is now tied to a dollar amount similar to a normal dental insurance plan.
This happened within the last 6 years.
 
Non class C Res F pay rates are determined by multiplying monthly Reg F rates by 12, dividing by 365, then multiplying by 92.8%.

However, that is a calendar day rate, not a working day rate. Assuming five working days is the equivalent of seven calendar days, the class A rate should be 40% higher.

Alternatively, look at the leave cash out calculation and see that they convert leave days from working days to calendar days; the precedent is set.
That's an excellent point I've never considered.
 
Non class C Res F pay rates are determined by multiplying monthly Reg F rates by 12, dividing by 365, then multiplying by 92.8%.

However, that is a calendar day rate, not a working day rate. Assuming five working days is the equivalent of seven calendar days, the class A rate should be 40% higher.

Alternatively, look at the leave cash out calculation and see that they convert leave days from working days to calendar days; the precedent is set.
Does that mean I should get extra if I work weekends?
 
That's more than compensated with your block leave in addition to annual and other leave provisions/holidays.

ah yes, of course, I enjoy that I can buy groceries with that leave. Really though if we’re going to determine part time pay based on a five day work week, then surely that assumes that all of the CAFs pay is built around a five day work week. Ergo over time or work in excess ought to be compensated for with either days off in equal measure or more day. Given that shorts are capped at 2, as are Specials that would mean that at most a full month in the field gets 4 days off in recompense. Not equal. Good for geese good for ganders and all that.
 
ah yes, of course, I enjoy that I can buy groceries with that leave. Really though if we’re going to determine part time pay based on a five day work week, then surely that assumes that all of the CAFs pay is built around a five day work week. Ergo over time or work in excess ought to be compensated for with either days off in equal measure or more day. Given that shorts are capped at 2, as are Specials that would mean that at most a full month in the field gets 4 days off in recompense. Not equal. Good for geese good for ganders and all that.

While there positions where folks do materially more than a five day week, the majority of full time CAF members deliver significantly less than that. Not a fault of the individual, just the reality.
 
ah yes, of course, I enjoy that I can buy groceries with that leave. Really though if we’re going to determine part time pay based on a five day work week, then surely that assumes that all of the CAFs pay is built around a five day work week. Ergo over time or work in excess ought to be compensated for with either days off in equal measure or more day. Given that shorts are capped at 2, as are Specials that would mean that at most a full month in the field gets 4 days off in recompense. Not equal. Good for geese good for ganders and all that.

I'm very cool with upping Class A pay rates. Or perhaps set a flat rate of something like 2K a month but you need flawless attendance.

Just an example, adjust as you'd like for rates actual.

As for time off, I did 240 days away from home last year. And as I have said previously, if the CAF wants me to do that again it's going to need to renegotiate my compensation with me, inclusive of pay and bennies.
 
While there positions where folks do materially more than a five day week, the majority of full time CAF members deliver significantly less than that. Not a fault of the individual, just the reality.
I don’t disagree I’m just making the point that if we’re assuming compensation for one portion is based off a five day work week the. It ought be applied to all.


I actually like the training bounty the Brit offer. Full attendance for the calendar year and green dag? He’s 1500 on December 15th.
 
Well, as long as the A Res hasn't been planned into our national mobilization effort, plus a bunch of other issues identified in this report related to the need for a 'greater contribution' from those slackers, I guess they don't deserve to get paid at all ;)


"In the New Vision, the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) notes a greater contribution from the Reserve Force is needed to achieve the CAF’s operational outputs. The Regular Force faces mounting pressure to concurrently execute its assigned or implied missions. The Reserve Force must be integrated into CAF Force Posture and Readiness planning in order to contribute to maximizing the operational output of the CAF and prepare for large-scale mobilization. While the Reserve Force is not integrated into such planning efforts, the latest FP&R directive identified this need."

 
Back
Top