# Soldiers serving outside the wire are asking for more money



## ark (10 Mar 2008)

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20080310/CPACTUALITES/80310033/-1/CPACTUALITES

Sorry the article is in French but I suspect it will be reprinted in English sometime soon. 

In short, some interviewed soldiers back from Afghanistan are complaining about incentives associated with living conditions and danger when it comes to serving inside and outside the wire. At the moment, soldiers serving in Kandahar are paid the same regardless of duties performed. Some of the interviewed soldiers would like to see an increase in incentives to those who are serving outside the wire. 

According to LCol Gagnon it would be too complex to keep track of who is doing what where in order to compensate soldiers accordingly.

Back in December, a soldier was rebuffed when he displayed his frustration in front of everyone.


----------



## Dirty Patricia (10 Mar 2008)

This is an age old issue and one that was brought up often in '06 and one can see why.  A soldier in KAF with AC, meals at the DFAC and ice cream on the board walk is not experiencing the same level of hardship as a soldier sleeping in the sand in the middle of a laager eating IMPs and sipping hot water.  Then there is the getting shot at and blown up aspect.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (10 Mar 2008)

This is one time where I do agree with an "us and them" approach.  As DP points out, there are certainly differences between living standards/risk within the TF.

However, the good LCol in the article is correct:  everything hinges on implementation and on tracking - mechanisms that are well nigh impossible to put into place.  On the surface, it is deceptively simple - X Coy is on a FOB and deserves Y.  Unfortunately, things aren't quite that easy and soldiers not _permanently_ but routinely "outside the wire" could easily be disadvantaged, despite the risks they're exposed to.  We could end up with a situation where HA and RA levels are determined _by individual_ and even then folks would be missed.  Maybe that's the way to go, but good luck making it fair.

This is indeed an age old issue and I remember it coming up in Bosnia years ago, where staff in Sarajevo received the same benefits as the battle group, despite considerably different conditions.  In the end, the mechanism was judged too difficult to implement back then (it may have changed after my roto, however) and everyone received the same.  The same happened on APOLLO and on the early (Kabul) rotations of ATHENA (both affecting me personally [grrr!]).  I suspect it will be the same here.


----------



## Sig_Des (10 Mar 2008)

Dirty Patricia said:
			
		

> Then there is the getting shot at and blown up aspect.



I'm not arguing the point that there is a difference between KAF and outside the wire, but I seem to remember Mak getting blown up at KAF:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060629/afghanistan_folo_060630/20060630?hub=TopStories

I'm not saying those outside the wire shouldn't be compensated more, but where would we go with the tracking? Different hazard levels such as different ops? Fobs level, whatever, KAF level less, Kabul level less?

When people at KAF go out on a convoy, do we work it like FOA? Track how often and when they go out?

Or should we just give an outside-the-wire bonus to guys who are out?

Like I said, I'm not against it, just wondering about the mechanics of it.


----------



## Spring_bok (10 Mar 2008)

Kabul was HA 4.  People on TV Tower Hill got HA5 and so did Recce Sqn whe deployed for more than 24 hours.  KAF is HA 5 right now and is the  highest.  If KAF gets reduced to HA4 (IMHO its prety comfy)  Then we may see HA5 remain for those outside the wire.  As far as tracking it can't be that hard, its just like FOA.  Clerks in Julien didn't have a problem keeping track.


----------



## X-mo-1979 (10 Mar 2008)

Or at the end of the tour clerks send in the nominal roles for their sqn/btln's with name and days spend outside the wire.When you get home you get a lump sum of the "outside money".


----------



## Dirty Patricia (10 Mar 2008)

Spring_bok said:
			
		

> Kabul was HA 4.  People on TV Tower Hill got HA5 and so did Recce Sqn whe deployed for more than 24 hours.  KAF is HA 5 right now and is the  highest.  If KAF gets reduced to HA4 (IMHO its prety comfy)  Then we may see HA5 remain for those outside the wire.  As far as tracking it can't be that hard, its just like FOA.  Clerks in Julien didn't have a problem keeping track.



There are 6 levels of Hardship Allowance.  After weeks out in the desert living in the sand on hard rats, sweating in 50 degree heat, hunting the Taliban and only getting HA5, one often wonders - "What the hell do you have to do to get Level 6?"!!!


----------



## Nfld Sapper (10 Mar 2008)

Dirty Patricia said:
			
		

> There are 6 levels of Hardship Allowance.  After weeks out in the desert living in the sand on hard rats, sweating in 50 degree heat, hunting the Taliban and only getting HA5, one often wonders - "What the hell do you have to do to get Level 6?"!!!



Move to hell?  ;D


----------



## Dirty Patricia (10 Mar 2008)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> Move to hell?  ;D


Some days I thought I was already there.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (10 Mar 2008)

Dirty Patricia said:
			
		

> Some days I thought I was already there.



I can imagine.

:cheers:


----------



## Dirty Patricia (10 Mar 2008)

Before some clerk jumps all over me, there is a Level 0 Hardship Allowance, so technically there are 7 levels (0 to 6).


----------



## helpup (10 Mar 2008)

This topic was recently brought up to the Army's Ombudsman through the Snr NCO mess.  It was introduced by a RSM as a point the troops have been vocal about.  At the time the original topic was awarding a bar, leaf or identifier to the medal to show the outside the wire people.  Pay was quickly added to the suggestion.  As I recall the conversation most of the people present were dead against it as it would bring up the "us vs them " and be bad for morale.  I pointed out that this is not a Cbt Arms thing and any changes have to take in account for anyone who leaves the wire, from mechanics, convoy escorts, drivers and the list goes on.  But from experience there is a large number on every contingent where they do not leave the gate.  

Some people that I respect a heck of a lot brought up the point of what would be the quantifier for it.  One day a month a week per month, who would administer it, wouldn't people now just jump at it as a do the minimum to get the bonus/medal?  I pointed out that deciding what would qualify is beyond my payscale.  But if they were worried about morale now how about the troops who are doing the job knowing that pay and recognition for their leaving the wire is the same as anyone who doesn't have to leave the camp at all.  Yes there is the chance of rocket/motor attack in KAF but it is not the same feeling as heading out the gate.  Yes those that do are less worried about the cash for doing their job and in most cases it is what they joined for, regardless of trade.  But I have heard and experienced it myself, your doing what you do outside the wire and it would be nice to have a form of acknowledgment in either payscale or as simple as putting a bar/ leaf on the medal.  Not going into the "CIB" equivalent on this thread.

Heck I don't need all the bonuses that are given to us for doing the job I and many that I know would do it with out the bonus.  ( but I wont give the money back mind you and the amount does make the home life for soldiers easier " honey I am on the next roto we can get that .............. you wanted now.)  But since it is there and pretty generous IMHO then there should be a easy way to add a level for those who work outside the wire.


----------



## helpup (10 Mar 2008)

To add to my earlier post, the general consensus from the meet with the Ombudsman.  Most of the Snr NCO's on our base are dead against it, as being too divisive, hard to implement, lack of precedence in past wars and just plain not needed.  I don't see that policy changing unless people like the CLS or CDS can be brought on board.


----------



## GAP (10 Mar 2008)

long long ago, and far far away.....we all received $65.00/month combat pay (tax free no less!!) thus making a Sgt's pay $265.00/month.... we all bitched about and were glad to get the extra $65.00, but that's what everybody got. I was inside the wire a large portion of the time, outside a lesser amount....didn't matter much..... and sometimes it was quieter to be outside the wire at Khe Sanh than stay inside it....same ol', same ol'....just a different pile.


----------



## Fusaki (10 Mar 2008)

> This topic was recently brought up to the Army's Ombudsman through the Snr NCO mess.  It was introduced by a RSM as a point the troops have been vocal about.  At the time the original topic was awarding a bar, leaf or identifier to the medal to show the outside the wire people.  Pay was quickly added to the suggestion.  As I recall the conversation most of the people present were dead against it as it would bring up the "us vs them " and be bad for morale.



I have a feeling that most of those who are opposed to this pay raise are not the ones who would be eligable for it. :


----------



## McG (10 Mar 2008)

Wonderbread said:
			
		

> I have a feeling that most of those who are opposed to this pay raise are not the ones who would be eligable for it. :


I tend to suspect the opposite if it was the Sr NCO of an infantry battalion.



			
				Spring_bok said:
			
		

> As far as tracking it can't be that hard, its just like FOA.  Clerks in Julien didn't have a problem keeping track.


There was far less going in & out the front gate in Julien than KAF.



			
				helpup said:
			
		

> As I recall the conversation most of the people present were dead against it as it would bring up the "us vs them " and be bad for morale.


I don't know that I buy into this argument.  Certainly, it would be far less divisive than fancy new medals or badges which may cast someone with the stigma of being a lesser soldier simply because they were placed in an important (read essential) job which kept then in KAF (or even inside the CP at a FOB) & not trigger pulling.   I see the money issue as appropriate compensation for work done.  If a guy is exposed to greater hazzard, then he deserves the greater hazard pay.  If a guy is exposed to greater hardship, then he deserves the greater hardship pay.

If the mechanisms can exist to implement Hazard & Hardship allowances in an FOA like fashion, then I'm all for it.  If not, then the next best alternative is to pay everyone like they are living out of the wire (as it is better to over pay some as opposed to under pay those who've earned it).  I suspect the CF is attempting to implementing the "best alternative."


----------



## dapaterson (10 Mar 2008)

I'd agree that the hardship and risk levels should be assessed for outside vs inside the wire.  No system will be perfect, but acknowledging the differences by providing additional pay would definitely help morale - and would meet the intent of offering the two allowances. 

I do remember one situation with some similarities - a "field" exercise where 95% of the folks were living in the field eating IMPs, and a handful of folks (myself included) were living in Mod tents up on base, with permanent facilities for ablutions and laundry, and eating meals in the mess.  Because it would be "too hard" to track the two groups separately (the words of the G1), everyone on exercise was paid FOA vice TD (back in the days when TD was $4 a day on base).

To atone for my sin, after endex I rang a bell and saw my ill-gotten FOA (and then some) disappear down a large number of appreciative throats.


----------



## TCBF (10 Mar 2008)

- I worked in a paper mill in 1973.  It ran 24/7.  We got paid shift differential, with the graveyard shift making the astronomical amount of $4.11/hr.  4-12s was less, and dayshift was just under $4.  The pay office - three people, I think - kept track of all hours worked on all shifts, plus overtime (different rates!) minus deductions (incl union dues and footwear plan) and did it all WITHOUT computers.

- They did it all right down to the penny and you can bet half our guys kept track of it down to the penny as well.  

- Yet today, with enough computing power to recreate the 'Big Bang', it is too complicated?  I call it laziness.

- Not saying there should be/not be different levels,  just that 'too hard to sort out' is NOT an excuse.


----------



## medaid (10 Mar 2008)

TCBF said:
			
		

> - I worked in a paper mill in 1973.  It ran 24/7.  We got paid shift differential, with the graveyard shift making the astronomical amount of $4.11/hr.  4-12s was less, and dayshift was just under $4.  The pay office - three people, I think - kept track of all hours worked on all shifts, plus overtime (different rates!) minus deductions (incl union dues and footwear plan) and did it all WITHOUT computers.
> 
> - They did it all right down to the penny and you can bet half our guys kept track of it down to the penny as well.
> 
> ...



The same goes for CBSA, it's quite a big organization, and we've had shift differential, holiday differential and overtime pay. It can be done. Someone just has to do it.


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Mar 2008)

...swipe cards at the clearing bays to track in/outs?


----------



## Yrys (10 Mar 2008)

... and if somebody access the database to know how many people in/out ?


----------



## Spring_bok (10 Mar 2008)

MCG said:
			
		

> There was far less going in & out the front gate in Julien than KAF.


Are you for real?  People left Julien alot more than KAF.  The only difference was they were going to the airport for a massage and some shopping then back a couple of hours later.  When people leave the KAF however they are usually gone for weeks if not months.  BTW, tracking was taken care of at the Troop /Platoon level, not by the guys at the main gate.


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Mar 2008)

Yrys said:
			
		

> ... and if somebody access the database to know how many people in/out ?



You mean the database that is already sitting on the LAN at KAF in the Headquarters?  I know the point you're trying to make, but there are other issues than tallying in/outs if someone has compromised the HQ DB.


----------



## McG (10 Mar 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> Someone just has to do it.


You're right.  Let's just cut a rifle section out of the TO&E so there is the someone to do this.  

It is a bit of a stretch equating TFA to a plant in Canada with a single front entrance, a predictable shift rotation, & uniform access to a shared high-speed computer network.    Will each FOB be the same rate?  Will Leager have a higher rate than a FOB?  How does KAF compare to CNS?  What rate do you give a patrol that spent the night in a leaguer but most of the day in a FOB?  What about a patrol with different start & end points; do we make pay part of a patrol commander's concerns?



			
				Spring_bok said:
			
		

> Are you for real?  People left Julien alot more than KAF.  The only difference was they were going to the airport for a massage and some shopping then back a couple of hours later.  When people leave the KAF however they are usually gone for weeks if not months.


This movement from Julien is clearly not relevant to a discussion on pay rates for time outside the wire.


----------



## X-mo-1979 (10 Mar 2008)

MCG said:
			
		

> I tend to suspect the opposite if it was the Sr NCO of an infantry battalion.



Snr NCO mess is a combined mess.


----------



## medaid (10 Mar 2008)

MCG said:
			
		

> You're right.  Let's just cut a rifle section out of the TO&E so there is the someone to do this.



I am merely saying that I agree with the fact that some jobs are more dangerous, and as such deserves higher compensation. Now I have no clue about how to implement this. Someone with a bigger hat and more stripes then I do probably has a better idea.


----------



## X-mo-1979 (10 Mar 2008)

MCG said:
			
		

> You're right.  Let's just cut a rifle section out of the TO&E so there is the someone to do this.



Why would you need a rifle section?


----------



## TangoTwoBravo (10 Mar 2008)

Shall we 'swipe out' from tour benefits when we go on HLTA?


----------



## COBRA-6 (10 Mar 2008)

X-mo-1979 said:
			
		

> Why would you need a rifle section?



Because if you add x number of clerks to the task force to calculate outside the wire pay you need to delete x number of positions from elsewhere in the task force, like gunners, infanteers, truckers, etc... it's zero sum game, to add one new posn you have to cut one old posn

I agree with the notion of outside the wire but the implementation would be an admin nightmare that would create more grief than it relieves!


----------



## X-mo-1979 (10 Mar 2008)

COBRA-6 said:
			
		

> Because if you add x number of clerks to the task force to calculate outside the wire pay you need to delete x number of positions from elsewhere in the task force, like gunners, infanteers, truckers, etc... it's zero sum game, to add one new posn you have to cut one old posn
> 
> I agree with the notion of outside the wire but the implementation would be an admin nightmare that would create more grief than it relieves!



Interesting.Where I work we call it secondary duties or multi tasking.

Send someone down to Timmys to get all the orders at once,that should make up the time.


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Mar 2008)

Tango2Bravo said:
			
		

> Shall we 'swipe out' from tour benefits when we go on HLTA?



T2B, one could program an reversion to HA4 (or whatever the min HA becomes for the garrison) while you're away on HLTA.  That could be accomplished by using a portable reader at the AMU, "swiping" you just before boarding the Herc/17 -- the cheerful Aircraft Security Officer to swipe your card while you prove your weapon to him/her.  

G2G


----------



## Michael OLeary (10 Mar 2008)

Tango2Bravo said:
			
		

> Shall we 'swipe out' from tour benefits when we go on HLTA?



Subcutaneous RFID tracking tags, GPS tracked 24/7, individual plots against a daily/hourly changing threat map with incentive bonuses for those within established perimeters around critical events.  Try disputing that data model after the tour.  For every low tech problem there is at least one inordinately expensive solution relying on untested layers of technology.


----------



## TCBF (10 Mar 2008)

Spring_bok said:
			
		

> ... The only difference was they were going to the airport for a massage and some shopping then back a couple of hours later.  ...



- A massage parlour at Kabul airport - who knew?


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Mar 2008)

Michael O`Leary said:
			
		

> ....For every low tech problem there is at least one *inordinately expensive solution* relying on untested layers of technology.



Don't forget frustratingly complex, as well!


----------



## TangoTwoBravo (10 Mar 2008)

I put that out there merely to see how far down the road we have wargamed to conclusion the impact of having exact tracking of where a person is on tour.  Be careful of what you wish for, because you just might get it.


----------



## McG (10 Mar 2008)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> T2B, one could program an reversion to HA4 (or whatever the min HA becomes for the garrison) while you're away on HLTA.


That would be the Theatre Support Base.  Good bye tax free status, hello:





			
				Tango2Bravo said:
			
		

> Be careful of what you wish for, because you just might get it.


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Mar 2008)

Part of the issue is people comparing themselves to others.  To put "theoretical blinders" on, and not worry about what other people are getting, people should consider if what they are receiving for allowances seems genuinely acceptable to them.  If people are honest with themselves, I would think that a lot of folks are actually content with the allowance package they individually receive.

G2G


----------



## Kilroy (11 Mar 2008)

When I served on TF1-06, I too said the people who lived outside the wire should get some kind of extra pay. And i was an inside the wire guy! I went on four road moves as a "right seater". If it is any consolation to those that served outside the wire, I thanked them every chance I got (usually when they came to pick up their LAV after I repaired soemthing in the turret) and thier reply was always "no problem". 

One other point on all this. There are also those that serve outside the wire, but never leave the FOB. Would those not be safer than people in a convoy? Are not most of the deaths caused by IED's or stupidcide bombers attacking our convoys? How would you factor in this?

Don't get me wrong, I agree 100% that those serving outside the wire going after those )*^&$*&^% Taliban pr**** deserve alot more than I ever got just repairing equipment. But I am but a humble EO tech, and i cannot presume to figure out how they would calculate this.


----------



## armyvern (11 Mar 2008)

Michael O`Leary said:
			
		

> Subcutaneous RFID tracking tags, GPS tracked 24/7, individual plots against a daily/hourly changing threat map with incentive bonuses for those within established perimeters around critical events.  Try disputing that data model after the tour.  For every low tech problem there is at least one inordinately expensive solution relying on untested layers of technology.



Sounds like the system they used to track "our vehicles" movements ... man, the UN gave me a speeding ticket (issued in Syria) for speeding in Eilat, Israel for crying out loud. Couldn't even start the darn vehicles without swiping our drivers license through the reader mounted on the steering column ... damn technology.    I can only imagine a person-mounted system ... and the placement of the swiper. 

Talk about feeling like Orwell was onto something.


----------



## Sig_Des (11 Mar 2008)

Kilroy said:
			
		

> Might be true, but the data is transmitted anyway, so regardless of the memoryin the unit, they know what happens, as it happens.



Not if you know what to disconnect. But of course, SDS never sped


----------



## armyvern (11 Mar 2008)

CSA 105 said:
			
		

> I "heard" that if one were to disconnect the battery on, say, a UN Toyota 4Runner, the tracking system's memory would be erased.  With a blank system, no record of alleged malfeasance could be proven if and when the Speeding Inquisition attempted to read the vehicle's movement record.
> 
> So I heard...  >



Yes, my trucker roomie decided to inform me of that bit of critical info _after_ my speeding ticket. To save me time in disconnecting batteries after that (and the beers that I made her buy me to make up for her 'oversight'), she ensured that I always got the good 4 runner -- that being one without the tracking system. I never got another ticket again, but wouldn't have gotten another one anyways as I didn't speed after that.


----------



## X-mo-1979 (11 Mar 2008)

Maybe EMAA and SAS can hook up together and calculate it.  ;D


I'm gonna step out of this one as I agree with troops outside the wire getting more pay,but don't see how it would be a huge admin burden.

PER point:Admin=developing ;D


----------



## rambo123 (11 Mar 2008)

There is got to be a way that they know who is serving inside and out side the wire, there are lists somewhere who is on the mission element and who is on the base defence side of the house. I agree that no matter where you are in afghanistan it is dangerous, but there should be a way that the members who are in combat outside the wire should be paid more danger pay.


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (11 Mar 2008)

This is an interesting discussion.

The issue was brought up in our task force (1-07) before we deployed in Jan 07 - by guys that had already been there, so we were aware of it ahead of time. Sometime before we left, the CDS came to us in Gagetown and had this big presentation as I suspect he does for every bg before they head over.
Anyway, the relevance of that to this discussion is, he was talking about different kinds of badges or insignias and things to represent things you may have done on tour - for example like a combat badge or something. 

Now while this doesn't really fix the pay problem, it could definately soothe alot of the troops that were subjected to the terrors of IEDs regularly and hunting Talib fighters in close quarter grape fields etc. Some recognition for what they had done - and while some may cry that just stretches the gap between the "us and them" problem - but isnt it true? These guys go out and fight the war with their bare hands and suffer through alot of things that anyone who has been there, I don't need to go into details over what im talking about; is it that wrong to even award them with a simple badge or something?

the KAFers can complain, but in the end , these are still the facts: A) they still got paid the same for being in Afghanistan, and B) they were not combat troops and IMHO (no offense to any of them) do not deserve to be recognized in the same light as the guys that are.

Not to start a shoving match with anyone but let's be honest: this isn't about my or anyone's ego, we all realize that the folks working in KAF do long hours and work hard to support us out in the field - but combat is combat and there is no middle ground. It's the least that could be done to show some honor to our fighting men/women.

Finally, personally I don't beleive that any kind of ammendment to pay or anything stated above is even necessary - but if it had to be done and I had a say in it for some reason, I would suggest an alternative like I talked about above - however

If we truly are an army of professionals then we all know who we are and what we did overseas and no amount of money or medals and badges is going to change that. I know what I did when I was there and I don't feel the need to display it or receive extra money or extra commendations for doing the job I had already agreed upon and signed up to do and no one can now ever take that experience or pride away from me.


----------



## 31C (11 Mar 2008)

Hmmm I think this is about greed and the age old us and them. There has always been a REMF's around, so take your hazard pay, but lets not get to crazy about subjecting ops to a stuplifying catorization process. There are always troops screaming for more money, of course there are, and there are always soldiers looking to stand out from the guy in another spot. Let's call it as it is then.

Besides the premise of more pay means you have to quantify how much. If you give them an extra 100 per month does that address the disparity in living conditions? Or is exposure to risk? I don't think there is a way to answer the questions to the deltail required to address what I think is really driving the issue. Those in tough spots resenting those they think are not. 

Those that face the enemy in all its forms should be given the respect and acknowledgemt deserved but not at the expense of the colective good. I agree with the sentiments that this issue is devisive and not in the best interest of the CF.


----------



## Good2Golf (11 Mar 2008)

31C, there's no need to be derogatory about combat service support folks. (re: your acronym)

*The Milnet.ca Staff*


----------



## 31C (11 Mar 2008)

Don't be over sensitive, the term to my understanding covers all shapes and sizes and trades, and it is the language soldiers have used for a long time. Combat arms staffers can be described this way, and people from the supporting arms can be in the mix up front. I think most understand this. I ended my carreer as a supporting arm so I think I can say this. It just goes to the point that these subjective perspectives taints this debate about additional pay to the point it is unintelligible. There are lots of examples where the term is used by troops to describe their own HQ staff in their own trade.

It is this oversensitve stuff that I think rubs guys out on the line the wrong way. Helps perpetuate the us and them thing. 

Why do I have to explain this....scary.

I think it is your corrective reply that could actually lend insult from my comment. Let me be clear the acronym does not mean what you think it does.


Notice i didn't use the term again..... ;D


----------



## George Wallace (11 Mar 2008)

Now, not one to not want more money myself, I do wonder why this is coming up.  While on Tour they are getting Danger Pay ( at the highest rate, if I am correct), Foreign Service Allowances, as well as everything being Tax Free.  The whole country is a "War Zone" and the appearances of "safety" shouldn't mean that some are more safe than others.  I will not argue the fact that some are "currently" closing with and engaging the enemy more so than others, but that is always subject to change.  I just get the feeling that a few, a very vocal minority, just can't get enough benefits to meet their expectations and egos.   Would there ever be enough to satisfy those few mouthpieces who constantly raise these issues?


----------



## Good2Golf (11 Mar 2008)

31C said:
			
		

> Don't be over sensitive, the term to my understanding covers all shapes and sizes and trades, and it is the language soldiers have used for a long time. Combat arms staffers can be described this way, and people from the supporting arms can be in the mix up front. I think most understand this. I ended my carreer as a supporting arm so I think I can say this. It just goes to the point that these subjective perspectives taints this debate about additional pay to the point it is unintelligible. There are lots of examples where the term is used by troops to describe their own HQ staff in their own trade.
> 
> It is this oversensitve stuff that I think rubs guys out on the line the wrong way. Helps perpetuate the us and them thing.
> 
> ...



31C, your understanding is not consistent with the majority's understanding.  REMF means only one thing.  It is not a term of collegial endearment.  It does not refer to the F or A1/A2 echelons.  Furthermore, finishing your career in the EME branch does not entitle you to say that using the term REMF is justified, or appropriate.

That you state that my oversensitive / corrective action to your use of the term only lends insult, is thin at best.  To also state that it is things like my reaction that "rub guys out on the line" the wrong way, and that it "helps perpetuate the us and them thing" (vice your using the term) is disingenuous.  Are you actually saying that your referring to REMFs is innocent, and my correction is what perpetuates the "us and them" thing?

To have used the term REMF in more of a jovial, friendly sparring mode would have been one thing, but to try and defend what you said and then make it seem like the DS response to what others clearly understand to be a derogatory term is what was inappropriate...that's out of line.

Warning stands.

*The Milnet.ca Staff*


----------



## Zoomie (11 Mar 2008)

I can't believe that this topic has generated over 4 pages of text!

What ever happened to just doing your duty and being thankful that you are getting paid decently and have excellent benefits.

There are numerous trades in the CF that daily face greater peril <in Canada>  than being outside the wire at KAF and they don't get paid extra.

In the end - if the whining continues, I see a reduction in HA being imposed on those living in KAF and no change at all for those outside the wire.


----------



## X-mo-1979 (11 Mar 2008)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Now, not one to not want more money myself, I do wonder why this is coming up.  While on Tour they are getting Danger Pay ( at the highest rate, if I am correct), Foreign Service Allowances, as well as everything being Tax Free.  The whole country is a "War Zone" and the appearances of "safety" shouldn't mean that some are more safe than others.  I will not argue the fact that some are "currently" closing with and engaging the enemy more so than others, but that is always subject to change.  I just get the feeling that a few, a very vocal minority, just can't get enough benefits to meet their expectations and egos.   Would there ever be enough to satisfy those few mouthpieces who constantly raise these issues?



As with you George I would love to get any extra $.

However it all boil's down to the certain trades who go out live in the desert for 6 months only to see KAF on HLTA,injured,or as a R&R in some cases.Had a friend telling me about being in the phone booths in KAF and listen to some guy telling his wife about a rocket that hit the camp and how scary it was.Never mind the rocket was 3 km away,and he may not have even saw it.And here he is sitting in the booth next to him after 4 months of being mortared constant,and having multiple people in his patrol killed,recovering from injury himself.He just sat there in disbelief.

Let's face it while the threat is there a clerk stationed at KAF can pretty well ensure he/she will be coming home.And infanteer,MSE Op on convoy's ain't too sure.

Take a look around at the loss's we have taken.Look at their trades.

There is a us and them and always was.However people are starting to look at Joe RMS clerk sitting in KAF getting paid the same as he is when he's the one out actually earning the hardship pay.Makes you think about WTF your doing this for the same pay.

Combat troops do deserve distinction,either the CIB (another discussion) or some kind of benefit. And seem we all like it money sounds good.
Our Snr NCO's in OUR combat trades should be fighting for a us and them mentality.It brings pride and esprit de corp.Maybe that's the problem and why soldiers are complaining for the money.Maybe if there was an ACCEPTED us and them mentality it would provide enough pride in ones job,to not ENVY the "other guy".

Either way I'm glad I am where I am.
At least I know what I do.And I know what the other guy does.Thats good enough for me.


----------



## X-mo-1979 (11 Mar 2008)

Zoomie said:
			
		

> There are numerous trades in the CF that daily face greater peril <in Canada>  than being outside the wire at KAF and they don't get paid extra.



Please tell me who cause I really can't think of it.Elaborate?


----------



## TheHead (11 Mar 2008)

Zoomie said:
			
		

> I can't believe that this topic has generated over 4 pages of text!
> 
> What ever happened to just doing your duty and being thankful that you are getting paid decently and have excellent benefits.
> 
> ...



Greater peril in Canada than outside the wire in Canada.  Are you delusional?

You're telling me that anyone who steps outside that gate, endures ambushes, IEDs, Mortar Attacks, Rocket Attacks, Suicide Bombers, the god awful drivers and an Enemy activley looking to kill those soldiers is safer than some trades in Canada?  Wow.......

Also how is asking for a higher allowance whining?   It's a valid concern.   Soldiers outside the wire want a higher hardship allowance because they live in shitty conditions compared to their brothers and sisters on KAF, they live harder lifestyles hence HARDSHIP allowance.   Comparing a soldier who lives on KAF for all 7 months to one who lives outside the wire for 7 months is like comparing apples and oranges. Yes they both do their job, serve Canada and Afghanistan proudly and professionaly but there is a HUGE difference in lifestyle.


----------



## benny88 (11 Mar 2008)

X-mo-1979 said:
			
		

> Our Snr NCO's in OUR combat trades should be fighting for a us and them mentality.It brings pride and esprit de corp.Maybe that's the problem and why soldiers are complaining for the money.


   When I read this sentence, I heartily disagreed. There's nothing wrong with having pride in your trade/unit, but I think the CF should do its best to promote pride and espirit de corps across the whole spectrum of trades. 



			
				X-mo-1979 said:
			
		

> Maybe if there was an ACCEPTED us and them mentality it would provide enough pride in ones job,to not ENVY the "other guy".



    This, however, made me think. Good point.


   Personally, I would have no problem with people outside the wire recieving a decoration, or even some monetary compensation. But I don't think we should actively TRY for an "us and them" mentality.


----------



## George Wallace (11 Mar 2008)

X-mo-1979 

What I am saying, is the whole country is a War Zone.  Yes, at the moment that clerk in KAF can more or less "sleep safe at night", but that can change at any time.  Years ago, a bus load of German soldiers was blown up as they were heading to the airport at the end of their Tour.  Were all these guys who spent their time outside the wire?  How about the one lucky rocket strike that hit the canteen and put shrapnel into the heart of the MBdr from 30 Fd in Ottawa.  Was he outside the wire when that happened?  Going way back to the days of the Russians.  Were their clerks safe inside the wire?  

In war, the situation can change in an instance.  What some are "whining about" is that at this exact moment they feel entitled to something more, because at this exact moment, someone else serving in a War Zone is in a "safer" place due to circumstances outside of their control.  

I don't want to belittle anyone's role.  How much respect or thought do we pay to the unsung heroes in the background who are keeping the Big Green Machine on the Track?  The guys pumping the fuel.  The guys providing overwatch with the UAVs.  The guys loading the ammo, fuel, rats, etc. on the flightlines.  The guys doling out the clean clothes and boots.  The ROPWL guys.  The list goes on.  What glory do they get.  There are hundreds required to back each individual in the front lines.  

I'm just wondering where the silver platter is.


----------



## TheHead (11 Mar 2008)

It's Hardship allowance though we're talking about George, that is the reason we get max Danger pay correct?   Yes you have a chance of getting killed on KAF every soldier who steps foot in Afghanistan does, I'll never undermine how dangerous ALL trades jobs are, BUT there is a distinct difference in how the soldiers outside the wire and inside live.  I've lived both.


----------



## CDNBlackhawk (11 Mar 2008)

Zoomie said:
			
		

> I can't believe that this topic has generated over 4 pages of text!
> 
> *What ever happened to just doing your duty and being thankful that you are getting paid decently and have excellent benefits.*
> 
> ...




First off, its easy for you to say that we get paid decent to be outside the wire, when your a captain and probably will never go outside the wire. I think its ridiculous  that a combat  soldier fighting "outside" the wire is getting paid exactly the same  as someone who never ever leaves KAF. 

Secondly, How about start naming these numerous trades that are so much more dangerous then serving outside the wire. Because Last time i checked, Soldiers Serving in Canada don't have to worry about Suicide Bombs, IEDS, Getting Shot at, Mortars Landing on them, Random rocket attacks, Ambush's... ETC


----------



## George Wallace (11 Mar 2008)

Well guys.  I guess my sense of Honour, Duty and Service is a lot different from yours.


----------



## Michael OLeary (11 Mar 2008)

Folks, this discussion is going nowhere and only serving to invite more aggressive postings.  It's locked until further official information (or related news stories) is available at which time the thread will be reopened for continuation with that new data.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------

