# CF Pay Raise 2009/2010



## Tewkster (23 Mar 2009)

Are there any news of a pay increase this coming April?  With the current recession, I am not expecting that we can expect much, but I am sure that others would also appreciate any information on this.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (23 Mar 2009)

It will happen when it happens


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (23 Mar 2009)

Did not the RCMP get a roll back and civil servants as well?


----------



## mr.rhtuner (23 Mar 2009)

This is interesting, haven't read of any pay raise.


----------



## GAP (23 Mar 2009)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Did not the RCMP get a roll back and civil servants as well?



was that not in the economic update last fall that everybody had so much fun with.


----------



## dapaterson (23 Mar 2009)

Current Public Service settlements are for 1.5%.  Gazing into my crystal ball I see something very similar for the CF.


----------



## armyvern (23 Mar 2009)

mr.rhtuner said:
			
		

> This is interesting, haven't read of any pay raise.



Of course you haven't; there's been nothing to read.



This thread is pure speculation being raised again this year. It is that time you know. Just need to run a search for "Pay Raise" ... and you'll see the same topic year after year after year.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (23 Mar 2009)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Of course you haven't; there's been nothing to read.
> 
> 
> 
> This thread is pure speculation being raised again this year. It is that time you know. Just need to run a search for "Pay Raise" ... and you'll see the same topic year after year after year.



 :boring:

and gets old fast too ......


----------



## George Wallace (23 Mar 2009)

Tewkster said:
			
		

> Are there any news of a pay increase this coming April?  With the current recession, I am not expecting that we can expect much, but I am sure that others would also appreciate any information on this.



Let's see.  My crystal ball predicts a raise matching what Chretien gave us in 1990.   :'(


----------



## Monsoon (23 Mar 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Let's see.  My crystal ball predicts a raise matching what Chretien gave us in 1990.   :'(


'Twas Mulroney, methinks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Mulroney


----------



## Nfld Sapper (23 Mar 2009)

hamiltongs said:
			
		

> 'Twas Mulroney, methinks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Mulroney



Yeah but George is suffering from mess tin syndrome

 ;D


----------



## George Wallace (23 Mar 2009)

hamiltongs said:
			
		

> 'Twas Mulroney, methinks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Mulroney



And I alreadly hate him for closing down CFE.   Yes.  One more reason to dispise the man.


----------



## armyvern (23 Mar 2009)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Yeah but George is suffering from mess tin syndrome
> 
> ;D


I thought I assigned _Mess Tin Syndrome_ a stock number and placed it into stock on a shelf so no one would ever get it.

George has been sneaking in to my  QM!!


----------



## Tewkster (23 Mar 2009)

WOW, I didn't mean to open a can of worms.  Never fails, someone does it every year.


----------



## George Wallace (23 Mar 2009)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I thought I assigned _Mess Tin Syndrome_ a stock number and placed it into stock on a shelf so no one would ever get it.
> 
> George has been sneaking in to my  QM!!




 >   I found the NSN for APS.


----------



## BinRat55 (26 Mar 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> >   I found the NSN for APS.



Lol!! Me too!! So now I can walk into Vern's office and PERSONALLY ask her where my pay raise is!!!


----------



## BinRat55 (26 Mar 2009)

Awwww,  my wink didn't work!


----------



## armyvern (26 Mar 2009)

BinRat55 said:
			
		

> Lol!! Me too!! So now I can walk into Vern's office and PERSONALLY ask her where my pay raise is!!!



Nope; no you can't. Someone assigned that same NSN to me!! I'm posted ... get ready Ontario (anything more specific than that hasn't been confirmed yet).

Besides, you already know what my reaction to such a question would be; and, it wouldn't be pretty.


----------



## TimBit (26 Mar 2009)

Re: PS raise. Members of PSAC got 2.4, 1.5, 1.5 and 1.5% over fourr years (starting from whenever the last CA lapsed). Personally, I was more than satisfied, given the current ecn context but some greedy buggers weren't...

Let's wait and see for the CF one, but for sure this govt is not Mulroney's nor Chretien's when it comes to military.


----------



## begbie (26 Mar 2009)

TimBit said:
			
		

> Re: PS raise. Members of PSAC got *2.3*, 1.5, 1.5 and 1.5% over fourr years (starting from whenever the last CA lapsed). Personally, I was more than satisfied, given the current ecn context but some greedy buggers weren't...
> 
> Let's wait and see for the CF one, but for sure this govt is not Mulroney's nor Chretien's when it comes to military.



Fixed it for ya


----------



## The_Dictat (26 Mar 2009)

IF we get a pay raise, we would get them around October with retro pay as all previous years.


----------



## CountDC (26 Mar 2009)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> I'm posted ... get ready Ontario (anything more specific than that hasn't been confirmed yet).



Hopefully you can come here and straighten out the Stores on the sea boot issues.  Big complaint for the navy here is that the stores will not exchange our sea boots as we are not on ships.  Someone seems to have missed the fact that sea boots are now our walking out work dress and not just for ship board anymore.  That is if the command chief doesn't have them straightened out before then.

I'll be keeping my eyes open for anyone walking into the building wearing chaps this APS.


----------



## CountDC (1 Apr 2009)

pay raise 3% effective 1 Apr 09!!!


you did pick up on the posting date right?   ;D


----------



## Eye In The Sky (1 Apr 2009)

CountDC said:
			
		

> pay raise 3% effective 1 Apr 09!!!



let me guess....April Fools??


----------



## Pelorus (1 Apr 2009)

In other news I found out today that LTA rates took a pretty major cut for the new fiscal year, I suppose most likely due to the fact that gas is cheaper than it was last year.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (2 Apr 2009)

boot12 said:
			
		

> In other news I found out today that LTA rates took a pretty major cut for the new fiscal year, I suppose most likely due to the fact that gas is cheaper than it was last year.



Wait for it...the prices here in Halifax are starting to climb again...must be nearly summer again...


----------



## BinRat55 (4 Apr 2009)

CountDC said:
			
		

> pay raise 3% effective 1 Apr 09!!!
> 
> 
> you did pick up on the posting date right?   ;D



It was April fools!! Can't find this number anywhere on the DIN (TB site included!!) I'm still curious about the raise retro to 2007 - the wage parity raise based on what the civ sector got, not the cost of living raise (2%) we get ALMOST every year!!


----------



## dapaterson (5 Apr 2009)

We're already at or about the PS raises - the "2%" is what they get for inflation, more or less, each year.


Indeed, looking at overall compensation the CF does quite well - for example, 5 weeks annual leave after five years (plus the 2 Xmas specials, plus short).  In the PS, that can take closer to 20 years...


----------



## BinRat55 (6 Apr 2009)

No argument here, but see

http://vcds.mil.ca/vcds-exec/pubs/canforgen/2007/102-07_e.asp

Para 4.


----------



## TimBit (6 Apr 2009)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> We're already at or about the PS raises - the "2%" is what they get for inflation, more or less, each year.
> 
> 
> Indeed, looking at overall compensation the CF does quite well - for example, 5 weeks annual leave after five years (plus the 2 Xmas specials, plus short).  In the PS, that can take closer to 20 years...



But wait there are two things here: the 2% (some like here get 3,5%) per year is skill improvement, and is within the bracket. And then every few years when the agreements are renegociated, all those brackets are raised by a few % per year: that is to cope with inflation. Now I guess that this is the raise most people are waiting for. I just wasn't sure which you meant?


----------



## CountDC (6 Apr 2009)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> We're already at or about the PS raises - the "2%" is what they get for inflation, more or less, each year.
> 
> 
> Indeed, looking at overall compensation the CF does quite well - for example, 5 weeks annual leave after five years (plus the 2 Xmas specials, plus short).  In the PS, that can take closer to 20 years...



and if things go the way they are talking now the package will get better - they are looking at changing the requirement for 30 days leave, currently set at 28 years, down as far a 20 years.  Of course like everything else this will take time to make it through the system and be approved so don't look for it this year.


----------



## begbie (6 Apr 2009)

TimBit said:
			
		

> And then every few years when the agreements are renegociated, all those brackets are raised by a few % per year: that is to cope with inflation.



I think some groups in the PS have received such treatment; most likely those with niche jobs requiring a degree of specialization over and above your average civil servant.  However, I have not received such treatment.   Nor have most civil servant's.

Here's what everyone can, at most, expect when the new pay rates are announced.  The following is from the _Expenditure Restraint Act_ (I have cut and paste what I think are the relevant sections):

Deemed Employees

(3) This Act applies to the following persons, who are deemed to be employees for the purposes of this Act: 

  (a) the staff of members of the Senate and the House of Commons; 

  (b) directors of the Crown corporations and public bodies named in Schedule 1; 

  *(c) officers and non-commissioned members of the Canadian Forces; and * 

  (d) the Chief Electoral Officer. 

Restraint Measures - Increases to Rates of Pay

Despite any collective agreement, arbitral award or terms and conditions of employment to the contrary, but subject to the other provisions of this Act, the rates of pay for employees are to be increased, or are deemed to have been increased, as the case may be, by the following percentages for any 12-month period that begins during any of the following fiscal years: 

  (a) the 2006–2007 fiscal year, 2.5%; 

  (b) the 2007–2008 fiscal year, 2.3%; 

  (c) the 2008–2009 fiscal year, 1.5%; 

  (d) the 2009–2010 fiscal year, 1.5%; and 

  (e) the 2010–2011 fiscal year, 1.5%. 

As an aside, if you wonder why it took so long for the Budget Implemenation Bill (Bill C-10) to get passed, go take a look at it.  It was a massive omnibus bill.  Changes were made to dozens of other Acts, new one's were created, along with all the budget provisions.


----------



## CountDC (6 Apr 2009)

corresponds to what I expected to get so no surprises there.  Just can't figure out why it always takes so long for us to actually get the increase when everyone knows already it is going to happen.


----------



## TimBit (6 Apr 2009)

begbie said:
			
		

> I think some groups in the PS have received such treatment; most likely those with niche jobs requiring a degree of specialization over and above your average civil servant.  However, I have not received such treatment.   Nor have most civil servant's.
> 
> Here's what everyone can, at most, expect when the new pay rates are announced.  The following is from the _Expenditure Restraint Act_ (I have cut and paste what I think are the relevant sections):
> 
> ...



Well... that is also what I received. And it is to cope with inflation. And it is sufficient, I think, in the current economic context. Since I joined the PS, I have been under PSAC and PIPSC, and both have had renegotiated C.A.'s which led to increased brackets. Haven't you?


----------



## TimBit (6 Apr 2009)

CountDC said:
			
		

> corresponds to what I expected to get so no surprises there.  Just can't figure out why it always takes so long for us to actually get the increase when everyone knows already it is going to happen.



Ah but these are the delights of bureaucracy...the spice of life.  :blotto:

On another note, I do agree it would be a darn good thing to increase leave at 20 years service. I really think it is the only bizarre thing right now in the CF, that it takes 25 years to go from 5 weeks to 6 weeks . My  :2c:


----------



## dapaterson (6 Apr 2009)

In the CF, a 22 year old with high school graduation and only CF-obtained job skills (and, given the rates of throughput in the training system, possibly not yet employable autonomously) gets five weeks of paid vacation.

In the PS, someone with a Masters in Economics would not see 25 days of annual leave until they reached 18 years of experience.

The CF leave policy is already rich.  And any proposals to amend leave are only that - staff discussion papers and examinations of options.  There have been no decisions to amend leave entitlements.


----------



## George Wallace (6 Apr 2009)

TimBit said:
			
		

> Ah but these are the delights of bureaucracy...the spice of life.  :blotto:
> 
> On another note, I do agree it would be a darn good thing to increase leave at 20 years service. I really think it is the only bizarre thing right now in the CF, that it takes 25 years to go from 5 weeks to 6 weeks . My  :2c:



You have that all wrong.  Young members of the CF have 20 days Annual Lve per year, and after five years, they get 25 days Annual Lve per year.  Where you came up with five weeks being extended to six weeks after 25 years is outside of my comprehension.  Did something happen while I slept last night?


----------



## George Wallace (6 Apr 2009)

TimBit said:
			
		

> Well... that is also what I received. And it is to cope with inflation. And it is sufficient, I think, in the current economic context. Since I joined the PS, I have been under PSAC and PIPSC, and both have had renegotiated C.A.'s which led to increased brackets. Haven't you?



That is one of the problems with the PS.  There are more than one Union, and each has to negotiate their contract separately from the others.  Of course these negotiations are not held concurrently.  

This has an effect on the CF, in that the CF, and the RCMP as well, have to wait until all the PS Unions have negotiated their contracts successfully, before any Pay increase can be announced.


----------



## TimBit (6 Apr 2009)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> You have that all wrong.  Young members of the CF have 20 days Annual Lve per year, and after five years, they get 25 days Annual Lve per year.  Where you came up with five weeks being extended to six weeks after 25 years is outside of my comprehension.  Did something happen while I slept last night?



George... re-read my post. I said, it takes 25 years to go from 5 weeks to 6 weeks. Well actually it takes 23, i.e. 5 weeks after 5 years and 6 weeks after 28. 28-5=23 right? 

No need to go stomping around without reading the post right... George.


----------



## TimBit (6 Apr 2009)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> In the CF, a 22 year old with high school graduation and only CF-obtained job skills (and, given the rates of throughput in the training system, possibly not yet employable autonomously) gets five weeks of paid vacation.
> 
> In the PS, someone with a Masters in Economics would not see 25 days of annual leave until they reached 18 years of experience.
> 
> The CF leave policy is already rich.  And any proposals to amend leave are only that - staff discussion papers and examinations of options.  There have been no decisions to amend leave entitlements.



I do think however that such a generous leave policy is consistent with the task, i.e. long days, field time, postings and so on, versus 37,5 (often much less...) in an air-conditionned office without moves. Which is my reality... for better and for worse.

I agree with you that the CF policy is very rich, with 5 wks at 5 years. It just would make sense to me to keep that "advantage" past 18 years of service, at which point people in the PS have the same leave, which can be accumulated as well, than people in the CF where it can't.


----------



## dapaterson (6 Apr 2009)

Given the CF's notorious tail-to-tooth ratio, some of the pay and benefits need to be re-examined, and moved from "everyone gets it" to "those actually doing it get it".  With over 10% of the Reg F trained effective strength in the NCR, things are out of whack.


----------



## begbie (6 Apr 2009)

TimBit said:
			
		

> Since I joined the PS, I have been under PSAC and PIPSC, and both have had renegotiated C.A.'s which led to increased brackets. Haven't you?



I am a member of CAPE and I misunderstood your comment.  

I used to work in an environment where some of us were classified as economists and others as scientists.  The economists were getting the standard 2.5%.  What I consider to be a cost of living raise.  The scientists were getting their 2.5% cost of living raise and getting another 'pay' raise on top of that for various reasons for which I can't recall.  It's that additional pay raise which is what I thought you were referring to.


----------



## begbie (6 Apr 2009)

TimBit said:
			
		

> Well... that is also what I received. And it is to cope with inflation. And it is sufficient, I think, in the current economic context.



Agreed.  Never underestimate the effects of compound growth (interest).  Just ask the guys who are buying back reserve time for their pension.

It's the most powerful force on earth.


----------



## BinRat55 (15 Apr 2009)

Hmmm... a little bit of reading (and a lot of squinting) through the Minister's Message (found at Reports on Plans and Priorities) you find a financial report that has funds set aside for a CF pay raise for 08/09 ($90M) and $180.4M for 09/10. I take that as an acknowledgement? Daddy needs a new pair of socks!!!


----------



## CountDC (15 Apr 2009)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Given the CF's notorious tail-to-tooth ratio, some of the pay and benefits need to be re-examined, and moved from "everyone gets it" to "those actually doing it get it".  With over 10% of the Reg F trained effective strength in the NCR, things are out of whack.




hmmm seems you are saying those of us that DND decided to post to NCR should not have the same benefit as those that are posted to such wonderful places as Halifax, Toronto, Vancouver, etc.


----------



## dapaterson (15 Apr 2009)

I'm saying that an office job is different from a sea job, and the compensation and benefits should be adjusted in consequence.  I'm suggesting that compensation for moves and upheaval should probably be weighted more heavily to those who get postings every 2 years or so, and those who spend a decade or more in one location should get less over time.  I'm suggesting that rather than spreading bilingualism pay over all CF members, only those with a valid profile should get it.

In short, I'm suggesting a much more tailored compensation system where the Maj with 20+ years in the NCR would see less benefits, and the PO2 who's bounced from coast to coast with stops in St Jean in between would see a richer package.


Of course, since it's the 20+ year Majors in Ottawa who drive these decisions, so it's not very likely to happen...


----------



## CountDC (15 Apr 2009)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> I'm saying that an office job is different from a sea job, and the compensation and benefits should be adjusted in consequence.  I'm suggesting that compensation for moves and upheaval should probably be weighted more heavily to those who get postings every 2 years or so, and those who spend a decade or more in one location should get less over time.  I'm suggesting that rather than spreading bilingualism pay over all CF members, only those with a valid profile should get it.
> 
> In short, I'm suggesting a much more tailored compensation system where the Maj with 20+ years in the NCR would see less benefits, and the PO2 who's bounced from coast to coast with stops in St Jean in between would see a richer package.
> 
> ...



ouch - talk about one big can of warms 

office job to sea job - guess that would be why I received Sea Pay while on the ship.

More pay for bilingual profile - see everyone running. Profile already gives an advantage on promotion boards and then add a higher pay level.  What is the use of the profile if you are never posted to a unit that needs it?  Guess you would have to make it if you are french, have an english profile and are posted to an english unit (or vice versus) then you get paid more - of course you have to allow for the different profile levels.

Got to say as a clerk - I sure don't want to see any of this.  We have our pay levels, enviro allowances, cost move claims and allowances that all together create a pretty good package. To start and admin a plan of johnny got moved 5 times while harry stayed local so lets give Johnny more pay is a night mare.  Mind you for the most part it will be support trades such as us clerks that will benefit - most hard sea and combat arms do not move around a lot.  I know of sailors that spent their entire career in Halifax bouncing from ship to ship and occassional land billets while some clerks have gone from office to office in different cities every 2 years.

Majors in Ottawa drive decisions?  I thought they were coffee boys.

Basically I would have to disagree with you on this one - there are simply way too many conflicts and admin headaches involved.


----------



## PMedMoe (15 Apr 2009)

CountDC said:
			
		

> More pay for bilingual profile - see everyone running. Profile already gives an advantage on promotion boards and then add a higher pay level.  What is the use of the profile if you are never posted to a unit that needs it?  Guess you would have to make it if you are french, have an english profile and are posted to an english unit (or vice versus) then you get paid more - of course you have to allow for the different profile levels.



Not to mention, trying to get on a French course for years, only to be told you don't need it and then getting posted to Ottawa.  :

Also, and this is _only my opinion_, it seems easier for a Francophone to be considered bilingual than for an Anglophone.


----------



## TimBit (15 Apr 2009)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Also, and this is _only my opinion_, it seems easier for a Francophone to be considered bilingual than for an Anglophone.



As far as testing  goes, I would say it depends on a lot of factors, i.e. where you do it (heard Ottawa was easier), who you do it with (a friend of mine, who is clearly not as good as me, got a better grade... go figure), whether you're just out of training, bla bla bla...

As far as actually being  bilingual, well stats seem to show that more francos are bilingual than anglos... I guess for most francos who want to explore the world a bit, English is not optional.

Anyway good luck on getting your course, I do understand the frustration for people posted here or in bilingual areas.


----------



## dapaterson (15 Apr 2009)

Done well, compensation systems can be relatively simple and reward behaviours we want, and give people options.

In the mid 90s there was a proposal to delink rank and pay to some extent - as your breadth of skills grew, the theory went, you became more valuable to the system - so it would be possible for a Cpl infnatryman with, say, advanced pioneer and advanced mortar skills to be paid more than a new Sgt.

However, since there was no new funding available, Trade Advancement through Skill and Knowledge (TASK) died - there would have been winners and losers, and no one wanted to make such a decision.


Admittedly, some support trades may well come out better off in the system I propose.  So?  If you're having more disruption to your life than an NCIOp who is posted to the left coast for a decade, shouldn't that be recognized in a more rewarding manner than just your MPRR?

Complexity can be managed through well-designed systems.  Many civ employers use elaborate compensation schemes - the time to make changes is now, as we prepare to retire the twin dinosaurs of CCPS and RPSR.


----------



## CountDC (16 Apr 2009)

I also remember that talk in the 90s and a factor that helped kill it was a Cpl making more than a Sgt that was their boss. If someone could make more as a Cpl than a Sgt then where is the incentive to advance?  I'll stay a cpl, do courses and make more money without taking on the responsibilities. Use to see this a lot in the reserves where the guys didn't want to get promoted as there were more employment opps as a Cpl. Then there is the question of where is the value achieved if the person has the skill but does not use the skill?
You now have a cpl for life that is restricted to pioneers as a mortarman in order to maintain his pay level. I can imagine all the ROGs that would generate.  I'll stick with the pay by rank system - wan't more money - work hard, get promoted.

Those that are posted do receive compensation in the form of posting allowances thus if you are posted more then you receive more. I received a months pay to move to Ottawa plus all my expenses were covered. Just wish they did not go to the current system as in the "old" days I knew people that would make over $10k on a move. Guess that is one reason they did change the system.  Still a months pay sounds like good compensation for something I knew would happen when I signed on the magic line. In fact the moves was one of the reasons I made the jump from pres to regs.  Really don't see the need for additional compensation for the more moves.  Would like to see better rules in place for allowable expenses from core funding plus the new rules this year are out to lunch for people that are home owners (discussed in another thread).

Overall I think our current pay and compensation system is good and only needs some minor tweaks vice a complete overhaul.

As for the last - "Complexity can be managed through well-designed systems..." you do remember you are talking about DND and Government?


----------



## dapaterson (16 Apr 2009)

CountDC said:
			
		

> As for the last - "Complexity can be managed through well-designed systems..." you do remember you are talking about DND and Government?



Note the use of the words well-designed - I can dream, can't I?

Alternatively, we can develop complex, unmanagable systems, but everyone involved will get "leading change" points on their PERs.


----------



## CountDC (16 Apr 2009)

now that is the military way!!

Sometimes it seems it would be nice to go back to the old and simple pay system. Adding machines front and centre, pay book to side, writing stick at the ready.  Pay problem?  No problem, come and see me and we will figure it out and give you your money.


----------



## RetiredRoyal (17 Apr 2009)

i hear management is taking a rollback on salary and we're being ordered to unionize and restructure.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (20 Apr 2009)

Office Linebacker said:
			
		

> i hear management is taking a rollback on salary and we're being ordered to unionize and restructure.



Come again?  Source?  Links?  The CF will be unionized??


----------



## spike2222 (20 Apr 2009)

Actually the pay raise last year for the forces was 2% IAW the CANFORGEN I had seen. Also why the cripes has the military pay raise always been tied to the civil servants? Where did the military component of the pay raise go(the reason military memebers get more pay ie putting life ones life on the line, eating lousy food, operating and living in lousy conditons) The US military pay raise certainly is not done this way and militay members just suck it up and take whatever crumbs they can get. Who made the public service the guide for military pay raises in Canada? Why not adopt something  like the US National Defense Authorization Act in which congress actually passes the annual pay and benefits. This year it was 3.9% http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:S.3001. Why does the Canadian military not have proper representation fighting for their men and women and why is there always a delay it seems. It used to be raises were every April???


----------



## Michael OLeary (20 Apr 2009)

spike2222 said:
			
		

> Actually the pay raise last year for the forces was 2% IAW the CANFORGEN I had seen. Also why the cripes has the military pay raise always been tied to the civil servants? Where did the military component of the pay raise go(the reason military memebers get more pay ie putting life ones life on the line, eating lousy food, operating and living in lousy conditons) The US military pay raise certainly is not done this way and militay members just suck it up and take whatever crumbs they can get. Who made the public service the guide for military pay raises in Canada? Why not adopt something  like the US National Defense Authorization Act in which congress actually passes the annual pay and benefits. This year it was 3.9% http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:S.3001. Why does the Canadian military not have proper representation fighting for their men and women and why is there always a delay it seems. It used to be raises were every April???



You must be new.

Military pay has not always been tied to the civil service.
The military component is in there, the scales are related, but we're not paid on the civil service scale.
Every April? Ever hear of the years of no pay raises, not even IPC increases.

Try doing some research before running off in a rant.


----------



## Lil_T (20 Apr 2009)

spike2222 said:
			
		

> Actually the pay raise last year for the forces was 2% IAW the CANFORGEN I had seen. Also why the cripes has the military pay raise always been tied to the civil servants? Where did the military component of the pay raise go(the reason military memebers get more pay ie putting life ones life on the line, eating lousy food, operating and living in lousy conditons) The US military pay raise certainly is not done this way and militay members just suck it up and take whatever crumbs they can get. Who made the public service the guide for military pay raises in Canada? Why not adopt something  like the US National Defense Authorization Act in which congress actually passes the annual pay and benefits. This year it was 3.9% http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:S.3001. Why does the Canadian military not have proper representation fighting for their men and women and why is there always a delay it seems. It used to be raises were every April???



You of course realize that CF members are paid a fair bit more than our American counterparts?

http://www.dfas.mil/militarypay/militarypaytables.html

Officer Pay  http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dgcb-dgras/ps/pay-sol/pr-sol/rfor-ofr-eng.asp

NCM pay  http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dgcb-dgras/ps/pay-sol/pr-sol/rfncmr-mrfr-eng.asp


----------



## CountDC (21 Apr 2009)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> You must be new.
> 
> Military pay has not always been tied to the civil service.
> The military component is in there, the scales are related, but we're not paid on the civil service scale.
> ...



curse you for bringing up the dark ages!!

The pay raises (when given) in the last 24 years have been more tied to Nov/Dec time frame back dated to Apr than actually given in Apr.  I think it is planned to give everyone that nice bit of back pay just in time for christmas holidays.


----------



## dapaterson (21 Apr 2009)

CountDC said:
			
		

> curse you for bringing up the dark ages!!
> 
> The pay raises (when given) in the last 24 years have been more tied to Nov/Dec time frame back dated to Apr than actually given in Apr.  I think it is planned to give everyone that nice bit of back pay just in time for christmas holidays.



Planned?  Not really.  More of the ability of DND/CF to assemble required documentation, negotiate with staff in the Treasury Board Secretariat, get a slot before Treasury Board, get TB approval, then announce.  Remember, over the summer much of gov't slows down to a crawl because TB rarely sits - so if it's not approved by 31 May you're probably looking at 30 Sept in a best-case scenario.


----------



## CountDC (21 Apr 2009)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Planned?  Not really.  More of the ability of DND/CF to assemble required documentation, negotiate with staff in the Treasury Board Secretariat, get a slot before Treasury Board, get TB approval, then announce.  Remember, over the summer much of gov't slows down to a crawl because TB rarely sits - so if it's not approved by 31 May you're probably looking at 30 Sept in a best-case scenario.



sure -you stick with the logic and official story - I'll go with the conspiracy theory.   >  (forgot the big smiley on prior)


----------



## spike2222 (21 Apr 2009)

??? I thought the pay raise always was tied to the civil servants (unless it is a catch up to the civil servants pay scale for similar type jobs). It seems that recently the pay raise was exactly the same. So the Treasury board stuff is smoke and mirrors. Having sat or is that slept through meetings the boards decision is made and no one fights on behalf of the military. yes there are budgetary constraints however one can argue that due to the ongoing conflict overseas, assisting with natural disasters domestically, assisiting with the olympics, chasing pirates etc the forces personnel deserve more than an AS-2 filing all day or an EX 2 attenidng meetings for a living.


----------



## dapaterson (21 Apr 2009)

Spike:  You thought wrong.  TB, a meeting of cabinet ministers, is the decision making body.  DND/CF brings forward requests for changes to compensation and benefits.  The ministers, briefed by staff on impacts, make decisions.  Sometimes, those increases are similar to those of the public service.  Sometimes (as in the late 90s/early 00s) they far outstrip those given to the PS.

There is a set of FAQs on the website for the Director, Pay Policy Development.  It might be worth your while to read it to get a better understanding of how the system works.

Besides, the CF benefits package includes several non-pay items that are extremely rewarding, including the current leave package (with 5 years in, 11 stat, 25 annual and 2 special days at xmas); pensionable with 25 years of service; 60/40 employer/member split for pension contributions...


----------



## PMedMoe (21 Apr 2009)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Besides, the CF benefits package includes several non-pay items that are extremely rewarding, including the current leave package (with 5 years in, 11 stat, 25 annual and 2 special days at xmas); pensionable with 25 years of service; 60/40 employer/member split for pension contributions...



Free dental and medical.....


----------



## CountDC (22 Apr 2009)

maybe you should also look at the job descriptions and pay rates.

A Cpl sitting in the office with the AS-2 does make more and if the AS-2 is just filing all day that is a management issue not pay issue.

As for EX 2 - guess that means you should be paid more than all the senior officers out there as they are their counterparts in the military.

Pay raises are in a way tied to the PS in that if they receive a 1.5% increase then we can expect to receive around the same amount.  Everything they receive in their contract is taken into account when our compensation package is reviewed.  The PS also looks at our package when negotiating their own.  Anyone else remember the stink raised in 2001(? may be off a year) when the military received the pay adjustment? PS cried foul in that the military was receiving a second pay increase that was a lot more than theirs.


----------

