Allowances - Post Living Differential (PLD) [MERGED]

[Halifax Tar]

I'm not "advocating" much of anything except that I think ~ I'm sure ~ that, after 45 years, a pay structure review is past due, but:

    My opinion is that leadership and/or technical management/supervision skills ought to be prerequisites for promotion to any rank ~ which is why I find favour with the US Army's
    specialist grades and with our trade groups. Leaders ought to be paid more than specialists. Combat leadership, in F Ech or even A2 Ech, exacts a physical and mental toll, it ought to be rewarded.

    It is also my opinion that we ought to be prepared to pay a premium for certain high skill and high (civilian) value trades and specialities ~ we are in a "business," of sorts, after all.

    In a long career I was never upset that people who flew aircraft or sailed ships (especially ships that went under the water intentionally) or kept me healthy were paid more than me. I was, equally, content, that an
    officer of the same rank and classification as me who made his living sleeping on the ground while I slept in my own warm, dry (accompanied) bed was getting an allowance.

    I believed, when I served, and I still believe now, that officers who are Commanding Officers or who command formations (MOGs, brigades, wings) should be paid a command allowance. I know that along
    with the many pleasures and privileges of command there are costs - monetary and other.

My list could go on and on and on ... which is why you want a team - military and civilian and the latter from government and the private sector - to do a formal, determined and complete review.

ER I like where your headed with this.  But just to make sure my giprock brain is onside with you, are you saying Rank+UIC+Trade+Responsibility Level = Pay Rate ?

 

[dapaterson]

However, right now many of those elements are part of the pay - but averaged out across everyone.

Thus, any such pay restructure will see winners and losers: the LCol commanding 1 RCHA would see more, while his desk driving peers in Ottawa would see less.  SImilarly, the bilingual bonus would stop being part of everyone's base pay, and only be given to those who (a) are bilingual and (b) are filling a position where it is required.

A similar sort of model was proposed in the early 90s and fizzled and went nowhere - because no one will ever acknowledge that they are overpaid, and thus deserving of a reduction to permit those in more strenuous positions to be paid more.

 

[Edward Campbell]

ER I like where your headed with this.  But just to make sure my giprock brain is onside with you, are you saying Rank+UIC+Trade+Responsibility Level = Pay Rate ?

I wouldn't want to prejudge the right answer. That's certainly a way to go.

The pay and allowances system must be:

    1.  A system that can be managed to meet the needs of the country;

    2. Fair to the employer (government) and employees (you folks) alike;

    3. Sensible ~ able to be understood, if not loved, by all ranks;

    4. NOT carved in stone because in 25 to 35 years it, too, will need a thoroughgoing review; and

    5. Competitive so that we can hire and retain the people we need and want.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Very interesting.  Just to play devils advocate for you, how would you counter the argument that geo area and UIC  and level of responsibility are all out of a members control but, under my interpretation of your proposal, they could have very adverse effects on ones pay.

Again I like where your going with this and in an alternate reality where this is implemented I see CMs being inundated with requests for postings at high pay UICs.  Perhaps our whole approach to postings and promotions needs to be looked and dissected too.

 

[dapaterson]

But we already have that impact with Sea Pay and PLD - get posted to a shore billet and the change of UIC means you lose Sea Pay; get posted further ashore and you'll cease receiving PLD.

If CMs can handle that issue, then further changes should not be too much of a stretch.

 

[MikeL]

My opinion is that leadership and/or technical management/supervision skills ought to be prerequisites for promotion to any rank ~ which is why I find favour with the US Army's
    specialist grades and with our trade groups. Leaders ought to be paid more than specialists. Combat leadership, in F Ech or even A2 Ech, exacts a physical and mental toll, it ought to be rewarded.

In the US Army those in the E4 pay grade are paid the same, regardless if they are a Specialist or Corporal. AFAIK, in the US Army a Specialist is just a E4 that isn't a NCO/leader, where as a Corporal is a NCO/leader.

Specialist or Corporal (E4) $23,756 >2 years experience $27,659 4 years experience $28,840 6 years experience

http://www.goarmy.com/benefits/money/basic-pay-active-duty-soldiers.html


Back in the 1950s - 1985 when there were different Specialist grades (4-9 at it's peak), AFAIK they were paid the same as Corporal(E4) and the various Sergeants(E5-E9) as they all shared the same pay grades - This is just based off a quick search, so I could be wrong.

 

[Old Sweat]

This has the making of a first class train wreck, especially if the department/forces/government caves to public pressure and throws a band aid and lots of money at the issue without a lot of thought.

Edward and maybe a few others are old enough to remember the five pay fields created for the NCM trades circa 1966 as part of the integration process. It then got screwed up with the first reduction in the number or trades and then the second stage when the MND decreed that there would be 100 trades as this would be a clear signal that the integration and unification project was a success. The pay field system caused all sorts of resentment, especially among the trades placed in the bottom two fields - three and four. As I recall, pipers were in 3 and musicians were in 4, while the combat arms had arbitrarily placed in 5. It was reported that if the combat arms had been assessed by the same standards used for the other trades, they would not even qualify for 3, as they fit none of the industrial criteria used by the designers. I think MPs were in a low field along with MSE Ops, Supply Techs and Cooks, for whatever that is worth.

Eventually the thing was scrapped in favour of one pay scale with specialist pay.

The officer thing got screwed up too, but not as badly except that there was a drain on pilots as the airline industry boomed, so pilots got a huge raise, unlike other aircrew officer classifications.

If there is a lesson, it is that the structure may need a hard look, but it should be done unemotionally and without outside pressure. (In 1979 there was a huge press tempest when it was revealed that Pat Mitchell, the Comd 1 CMBG, had set up a system to help his young soldiers and young officers qualify for welfare as they could not survive in Calgary under the existing pay scales. The then CDS was all set to make a horrible example of Pat, after having announced that army generals in Western Canada should not be circumventing the pay system. Fortunately Senator Stan Waters - LGen ret and ex-FSSF and PPCLI - got PM Clark to publicly state that he saw nothing wrong with officers looking after their troops.)

 

[Quirky]

I would have to say that we do make a "living wage."

An untrained Pte, basically unskilled labour, makes over $30K. Cpl 4 makes almost $60K at the journeyman-trade level. That's before any of the spec trades get their spec pay (which is considerable).

While Mr McKay hits it on the head in asking for a PLD review, he misses the boat by directly asking for more pay (which will be rejected outright. But I suspect he already knows that).

More pay is not the way to go (IMHO).

A PLD system that is actually responsive along with a Treasury Board that actually looks after us (instead of strictly the bottom line) is what we need.

Yup, there is nothing wrong with our base pay scale and I'd say it's pretty competitive. However I'd like to see a few changed made within the trades - e.i. qual-based pay increases. For example, why should a POM and A Level Cpl make the same amount of money when the latter has significantly more responsibility, both in maintenance and leadership. I'd like to see spec pay kick in after a tech gets his A Levels rather than his QL5s. This would eliminate the lazy-POM syndrome and would force techs (not all) to actually give a damn about their jobs.

For the Cold Lake issue, I don't see a solution happening anytime soon with the oil industry right next door. People are getting fed-up with the overall situation here and it's at a tipping point right now. I know that our unit is currently operating well below where we should be man-power wise. Quals and experience keep aircraft flying and the dozen or so qualified people, like myself, who are still here are getting tired it.

 

[McG]

Sounds very similar to Edmonton in 2005-07 were any affordable housing for young families had multiple bidders and the rental vacancy rate was under .5%. 

Yep.  Like Edmonton, that market will also hit a peak or plateau and it will see a plummet with CAF homeowners loosing big dollars.  Hopefully, someone is planning for that even as the current crisis is addressed.  Maybe there is a common answer to solve or ameliorate both the current and future problems.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I thought CL screened as semi-isolated and that semi-isolated and isolated postings don't qual for PLD because they fall under isolated/semi benefits.

Am I out to lunch?

 

[Ostrozac]

There are financial benefits for isolated postings, but there are only six isolated locations. Alert, Goose Bay, Iqaluit, Masset, Whitehorse and Yellowknife.

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dgcb-dgras/pub/cbi-dra/11-eng.asp

I have seen Cold Lake often referred to as "Semi-Isolated", but I've also seen career managers post members there without going through the OUTCAN-style screening that you need to do for Yellowknife. I don't know if I've even seen an official definition for the term "Semi-Isolated".

 

[PuckChaser]

Yep.  Like Edmonton, that market will also hit a peak or plateau and it will see a plummet with CAF homeowners loosing big dollars.  Hopefully, someone is planning for that even as the current crisis is addressed.  Maybe there is a common answer to solve or ameliorate both the current and future problems.

Treasury board is planning for it, they've got all the red ink and DENIED stamps ready for the HEA loss applications.

 

[ARMY_101]

Does anyone know when/why Ottawa was removed from being eligible for PLD?

 

[PuckChaser]

Does anyone know when/why Ottawa was removed from being eligible for PLD?

Ottawa was removed because it was determined as the new baseline for PLD.

 

[ARMY_101]

Ottawa was removed because it was determined as the new baseline for PLD.

Any idea on the year? From this thread it's sounding like maybe 2009-2010?

And any information on why they would choose a city with a highly inflated housing market as the baseline for determining whether other cities were also inflated?

 

[George Wallace]

And any information on why they would choose a city with a highly inflated housing market as the baseline for determining whether other cities were also inflated?

Which city with a highly inflated housing market would you suggest as being the baseline?

 

[Ostrozac]

Any idea on the year? From this thread it's sounding like maybe 2009-2010?

And any information on why they would choose a city with a highly inflated housing market as the baseline for determining whether other cities were also inflated?

That Ottawa-Gatineau-NCR was to be the new baseline was announced in 2007, I believe. As to why the NCR was picked -- I've heard two credible stories. One possible explanation is that Ottawa is the baseline for the civil service pay that our pay packages are tied to, and therefore if we were to baseline PLD on a location like Fredericton, that may not be cool with Treasury Board. Another credible theory I've heard is that CFSU(O) is our largest single garrison, therefore why not baseline based on the largest base? I'm not sure about the second explanation -- I've seen conflicting numbers that suggest that CFB Halifax may actually be our biggest base.

Internal communication on PLD has been very shaky, for an allowance that was supposed to be adjusted and updated regularly.

 

[ARMY_101]

Which city with a highly inflated housing market would you suggest as being the baseline?

I wouldn't suggest it be tied to any inflated market, especially not Vancouver, Toronto, Ottawa, or Montreal. It should be tied to a relatively stable city that isn't seeing its housing market explode (and won't see its market crash in the next 3-5 years). Finding that city is beyond my education or pay grade, but it certainly shouldn't be one of the five most overheated markets.

The average Canadian house is going for $380,000 these days according to this and this, driven up no doubt by the increase in $500,000+ price tags in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, and Montreal.

According to this TD Bank report: the average home affordability was about 26% of household income from 2000-2010. From here, base the PLD amount around the difference between the individual's household income (their rate of affordability) and the market they live in.

A corporal making $50,000 per year (for rounding sake) spending $2,000 per month on a mortgage should be helped a whole lot more than a Captain making $75,000 spending the same amount on a mortgage. This would account for the difference in income as well as geographic differences.

 

[Journeyman]

I know this is going to raise the hackles of the "I'm entitled to my entitlements crowd," but does the Cpl....or even the Capt....need to spend 26% of their income on housing?

When starting out, housing-wise, we bought much smaller than many people we knew. As the investment grew, we traded up.  When posted to Ottawa, I commuted from out of town where real estate prices weren't as stupid.  You choose your lifestyle.

If Cpl Bloggins chooses to buy an overpriced, multi-bedroom, insta-house in the latest, trendy Ottawa sub-division -- ie, if 'keeping up with the Jones' trumps living within ones' means, that is a self-inflicted wound.



The added bonus of living within means is that, when the soon-to-be "ex" gets the house, it's a less-painful financial loss 

 

[ARMY_101]

$1000 per month on a mortgage isn't unreasonable in a growing number of cities; rent is easily that price or more for a basic one bedroom apartment, so why not spend it on owning property?