Liberals Want Injured to Keep Getting Danger Pay Back in Canada

[the 48th regulator]

hmm,

Interesting, wonder how the public will react when the media get a hold of this information.

Should be a quite the news story. Wounded Troops refusing and returning danger pay, based on principle.

dileas

tess

 

[Kiwi99]

Sarcasm is a wonderful tool. is'nt it?  Well done on using it so eloquently.
The soldiers that fight in Afghanistan today are different from soldiers of other wars and peacekeeping missions.  The way that you sarcastically ridicule the possibility of a soldier being too damn proud to expect a handout says little.  believe it or not, there are soldiers who, although wounded, would rather get back to grips with the enemy and sort them out well before they accept more money from the government.  One day they will sit back and think of the things that money could have got them, but they will sleep easy knowing that they killed more enemy instead and didn't spend their lives complaining of what they deserve and what they  didn't get.

 

[vonGarvin]

I'm a bit iffy about the policy; however, if someone were to give me a few grand, well....

Kiwi does raise a good point: how far back does this go?  Troops from Cyprus 74?  I doubt it.  Bosnia/Croatia in the 90's?  Dunno.  But getting money to the troops is a good thing.  The only thing I personally find "iffy" is the knee-jerk reaction of the whole affair.  Still money to the troops, as I said, is never really a bad thing.

Now, I'm usually sarcastic, but again Kiwi makes a good point about wanting back in the fight (as it were).  I still remember the old 309 (3): Infantry Platoon and Section in battle.  One point about casualties, both physical and mental, is to get them back into the fight as soon as possible in order to reduce the long term psychological effects.

 

[the 48th regulator]

Uhuh,

So, are they returning the Money or are you making that up?  As a former wounded soldier, I take an interest in the view of modern wounded soldiers, just find it interesting you commenting on that.

And this wanting back in the fight, must be a new concept too....

dileas

tess

 

[Kiwi99]

Why woulnt they want to get back in the fight?  As for the money, thats what they say, so who am I to question whether they will or will not.  But as for getting back at timmy taliban, you bet your a**.  Like I said, a different breed of soldier.  Warfighters, each an every one of them.  And it isnt a new concept at all.  March towards the sound of the guns.  Not away from it.

 

[the 48th regulator]

And this wanting back in the fight, must be a new concept too....

It's my continued theme of sarcasm....

Different breed of soldier, yep, stop the act Kiwi99.  You got a point make it, you want to comment on the feelings wounded , then back up what you say.  Especially when someone asks a question, instead attacking.

You find me sarcastic?  I find you condescending.  You seem to forget this is a forum made of people who have served, and have felt the same as you and the modern soldier.

dileas

tess

edit spelling and grammar

 

[Kiwi99]

Well then say what ya gotta say and can the sarcasm.  All that does is get people pissed off.  My point is, wounded soldiers getting paid all their allownaces for theater when they are not in theater is wrong!  You get hit, you get medevaced.  And as stated in this thread earlier, they get more than that from their benefits and so on from Govt orgs and VA.  And that system has improved also.  Where is the cut off point for these allowances?  Nobody seems sure, so are we going to have issues with Cyprus and Bosnia Vets like yourself getting left out.  What criteria has to be met.  As a result of enemy action, or breaking an ankle going for a run?
And what of the soldiers that do not get wounded. Then they should get an extra bonus as well, for not getting hit.  Sounds good to me. 
Endstate being this, it mis an open ended policy that will not cover all the bases and does nothing for the CF as a whole.  Toom many people have jumped on a band wagon that has no driver.  Sounds good in principle but fails in practicality. 
I am aware that this is a forum where serving and ex members can communicate.  But money is not the answer to this problem. What is, who knows.  But money is not the answer.  maybe we should keep it the way it was for years.  But if people keep on this drive for paying off soldiers, what next?

 

[the 48th regulator]

Hey Well said,

Again, my question is, you spoke to wounded soldiers that disagree with this policy, will they be refusing this money and returning it?

If that is the case, then your point is valid, in that the actual soldiers affected will tell it to the government.

Answer me that, is all, why you went a rant about my sarcasm and talking about the new breed of warrior is beyond me.

dileas

tess

 

[retiredgrunt45]

George is right about UI. If you receive a pension from the military (for 10 or more years service) you are not eligible for UI benefits. If you have less than 10 years, you receive return of contributions, this must be used + your severance, before you can become eligible for UI. The calculations for this are complicated and at the end only benefit the government. You can place this money into an RRSP, which will shorten the time period some , but now you do not have direct access to that money without paying a second huge tax penalty. The system makes sure that the government always benefits.

A few years ago the RCMP tried this UI subject in court and lost, they are under the same system as the military.

Bottom line is, if you draw a military or RCMP pension ,you will never see UI benefits, unless of course, its from employment benefits after retiring from the military.

So for all your career minded types, ;D when you look at your pay sheets and see the UI benefits deducted box, this is money which you will never see again. You are paying for someone elses benefit.

 

[vonGarvin]

Guys.....let's take a breather and agree to disagree...or agree violently...whichever.  Or take it to PMs.

 

[the 48th regulator]

Will do Hauptmann,

Once I get my answer.  I am curious, and I find such an answer desrves to be made avaiable to all.

We have agreed, and agreed to disagree in the past Kiwi and I.

dileas

tess

 

[Kiwi99]

They are a different breed of soldier in a sense that most of them haven't been involved with peacekeeping of any kind, nor have they wanted to.  The Ptes and Cpls in todays army joined for the reason of going to Afghanistan and fighting a war and killing the enemy.  that is what makes them different from other soldiers.  They haven't been polluted by the peacekeeping myth.

 

[3rd Herd]

Bottom line is, if you draw a military or RCMP pension ,you will never see UI benefits.

Right now I am getting medical EI benefits while VAC figures out settlement amounts, rehab monthly funding,(new charter coverage), back dated monthly pension( old charter). Now EI does not mind both, BUT VAC is going to clawback amounts paid from medical EI when every thing is finally settled. My EI representative both sent myself a letter to forward on to VAC and personally phoned VAC to advance his opinion of the claw back.

 

[the 48th regulator]

Again, my question is, you spoke to wounded soldiers that disagree with this policy, will they be refusing this money and returning it?

dileas

polluted Peacekeeping soldier

 

[Kiwi99]

refusing!!!

 

[RHFC_piper]

Just a heads up for those who are arguing the point;

1) I was wounded and was medevacted after only 3 weeks in theater
2) I recieved my ALOA and have no intentions of returning it and don't know anyone who has been wounded who would or has (at least not from my tour)
3) I would like nothing better than to 'get back into the fight', but first I'd like to walk with out a limp, and perhaps run again... Physio may take time... lots of time.
4) VA, the 'Govt' and CF have given me the grand total of $0, and because of the nature of my wounds, and the fact that I might be employable again, someday, I won't be getting anything from them for a very very long time, if at all.
5) Overseas allowance is an incentive for troops to deploy... take that incentive away for any reason and troops won't want to deploy. 

I would gladly go back over to Afghanistan. so much so that I requested to go back with the company 1 RCR is sending with 3 RCR in 2008.  But... and this is a big one... as of late, I've had some issues with my current contract and pay that have almost made me want to leave the forces all together. (I won't go into detail, as the issue has been solved and I'm no longer in serious debt... but I was worried).

The ALOA I recieved, to me, isn't an 'XBOX' or 'New TV', it is rather a cushion for when the Military either decides to cut me loose or deems me employable back in the real world.  Since I'm a reservist, that means going to find a real job, which may be difficult as standing for an hour leads me to taking mutiple pain pills.  And if that doesn't work out, then I have to wait for VAC or 'the Govt', which, as anyone who has delt with them know, takes a long, long time.

Unfortunately, as I've recently found out, bills don't wait for VAC, 'the Govt' or the CF.

It's easy for those who are not in this situation to question and attack it, but I can guarantee that if you found yourself in this situation, you'd find yourself changing your tune.

As I've said before, and as been said many times by others; I wasn't begging for this money, but since it's been handed too me, I'm not going to turn it down.

As much as I'd like to continue this arguement, I just don't see the point anymore.  It's done, and unless it effects you, you'll never understand.

 

[the 48th regulator]

refusing!!!

Cheers,

That's what I wanted to hear, the wounded soldiers are refusing to accept the ALOA implemented by the current government.

dileas

tess

 

[Gunner98]

Has anyone seen any policy documents on the continuation of allowances?  There is a 27 Jan 07 policy document that extends Operational Allowance to 25 days (if hospitalized in LMRC) or return date to Canada whichever comes first.

 

[3rd Herd]

They are a different breed of soldier in a sense that most of them haven't been involved with peacekeeping of any kind, nor have they wanted to.  The Ptes and Cpls in todays army joined for the reason of going to Afghanistan and fighting a war and killing the enemy.  that is what makes them different from other soldiers.  They haven't been polluted by the peacekeeping myth.

Kiwi99
you had better pull back and reevaluate. Seems to me in the public forum of information that you ignore, I guess those Croats in the Medak died of natural cause ? Did the Greeks and Turks in March of 1974 also die of natural causes ? I guess also there was a massive amount of CAR training accidents which led to "By the end of the operation, more than 30 CAR men had been wounded and two had been killed."(Bercuson) So you can perpetuate a myth or do a little research. And maybe if you were not so opinionated some of those "peace keeping " privates and corporals would let you in on some of the unknown history.

Source:
Bercuson, David. Significant Incident: Canada's Army, the Airborne, and the Murder in Somalia (pg 195)

 

[Dirty Patricia]

5) Overseas allowance is an incentive for troops to deploy... take that incentive away for any reason and troops won't want to deploy.

The money is nice and it pays for my Harley, but that's not why we go.