Author Topic: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)  (Read 163719 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Brasidas

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 20,615
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 535
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #375 on: January 13, 2015, 04:02:40 »
Now lets get rid of spec pay all together, and see how fast people in those trades leave those trades the CF.

FTFY

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 36,405
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,569
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #376 on: January 13, 2015, 05:56:38 »
FTFY

thank you, that is what i was trying to say. Any way I think it would take something like a mass exodus from those spec pay trades to really see a over haul of our pay system, yes I understand not every trade is equal but Why should navy and airforce techs get spec pay and not army techs for example? Even with spec pay the grass is greener for many of these trades civi side. I once met in Borden a aircraft structures tech who was leaving the CF after he was done teaching a course after being offered a job for 4 times what he currently made. Now I understand the CF can't compete with that kind of money however the CF I believe has to be somewhat competitive with the private sector to attract people.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 214,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,612
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #377 on: January 13, 2015, 08:07:50 »
So, you are suggesting a materials tech has the same responsibility as say, a multi-engine aircraft flight engineer.   Or risks themselves and has a skillset comparable to a SAR tech.  Both of those trades are Spec 2, while mine is Spec 1 yet we are all involved in flying ops.  You'll never hear me say I should get Spec 2 because they do so I should too.

If you don't like your trade, VOT, take your commission, or something.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2015, 08:20:41 by Eye In The Sky »
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline rmc_wannabe

  • CADPAT Computer Nerd
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 16,715
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 453
  • NTLDR is missing, PRESS Ctrl+Alt+Del to restart
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #378 on: January 13, 2015, 10:02:40 »
If you don't like your trade, VOT, take your commission, or something.

I love my trade, I just wish to be compensated in a manner comparitive to others doing the same work type of work in the CAF without having to VOT in order to get it.

I think its too easy to suggest people VOT or Commission or Release IOT gloss over the bigger problem at hand.
"One of the most feared expressions in modern times is 'The computer is down.'"
 -Norman Ralph Augustine

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,400
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,596
  • Crewman
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #379 on: January 13, 2015, 10:31:13 »

I think its too easy to suggest people VOT or Commission or Release IOT gloss over the bigger problem at hand.

I suppose this is what the differences between some members of the CAF, and what Trades that they are in, comes down to.  Some members join the CAF with a sense of duty.  Others join the CAF as an easy way to get an education in a certain field and a Trade for a civilian occupation.  Some join purely for monetary reasons.  There are many reasons one joins the CAF.  One who looks closely at the people in all the various Trades and Occupations between all the Elements of the CAF will see different degrees of dedication to the CAF and vastly different work ethics.  Some members actually think that they are working in "9 to 5" jobs.  Some members have very inflated senses of entitlement.   In today's military, technology is used at all levels in all Trades, so points about needing a certain level of education are becoming mote points.  Some Trades and Occupations do require higher education than others, but in the end all Trades are working as one cog in a much larger machine.  Which cog, if removed, will NOT cause the machine to fail to function?  Are some cogs more essential than others in the machine to keep it functioning; and more importantly, are those the cogs that ensure the machine fulfills it main function?   
   
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 214,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,612
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #380 on: January 13, 2015, 10:57:42 »
I love my trade, I just wish to be compensated in a manner comparitive to others doing the same work type of work in the CAF without having to VOT in order to get it.

I think its too easy to suggest people VOT or Commission or Release IOT gloss over the bigger problem at hand.

If you are ACISS and sitting next to an ATIS Tech doing the 'same work' right now, will you be posted to a NavAids section next, keeping the PAR up or whatever radar system?

Because that 226er could be.  ATIS Techs do everything on a Wing "comms related" except the stuff we have onboard; that is an AVS world piece of kit then.  Point?  226ers do a lot in their trade and you can't just look at the micro-bubble of the CAF you are in and limit it to that.  226 folks could be on the helpdesk one month, and then NavAids the next keeping TACANs and RADARs up, directly supporting the ability to conduct missions. 

For RCAF 500 series, I guess it is easy for the Air Ops folks to justify their spec. Our Tech's keep aircraft in the air, and with that is a great amount of responsibility directly involved with mission success.  Case in point.

I feel for you guys in the army sigs NCM world, I do, but you can't blame the spec pay system, or anyone other than the Army C & E folks for the clusterfuck the ACISS world is in.

If people are that unhappy, do something.  If you want out, there is VOT, release, CT, etc.  If you want to stay in the trade but aren't happy...and feel you've been wronged, submit a well-written and supported grievance. 

 
« Last Edit: January 13, 2015, 11:03:10 by Eye In The Sky »
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline upandatom

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 6,475
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 434
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #381 on: January 13, 2015, 12:55:42 »
Its not a big deal in any trades that have had it for years. Anyone trying to change/add it, TBS puts up so much red tape we're waiting years for pay reviews to be completed.

Its not just a matter of TB red tape, I fully agree with that, I dont understand how someone that has no clue what the ACTUAL job entails can decide of specialist pay, but alos the higher ups that said, "All or none" and then "IST, and CST, and LST" and then "IST, CST" and now its "hopefully CST"

The red tape is ridiculous for giving benefits and way to easy to take them away. Look at what it took to increase pay after the 90s, and even now we still dont compare to other militaries out there. And before you give me some thrid world army that you get a bag of rice and twenty bucks a month, WE ARE NOT THAT COUNTRY. We are a highly developed world leader. Called upon for humanitarian, strategical and tactical ops throughout the world by our peers.
Before you even mention the poor pay in the states for their military, even when deployed, Look at the local economy benefits they recieve for discounts on vehicles, groceries, Housing(that isnt run by a corrupt money grab covered in more red tape, that is ran by their own people) so in their economy it balances out. Their trade specs and qualifications carry over to civilian side without having to pay some college to do it.
Members are paying $1100 plus $300+ a month for heating bills, and im pretty sure also paying for their garbage pick up soon. for a Newpsaper insulated, mold infested PMQ. with very little PLD. That, once again is tied up in red tape.
I am McLovin

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 36,405
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,569
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #382 on: January 13, 2015, 16:41:41 »

If people are that unhappy, do something.  If you want out, there is VOT, release, CT, etc.  If you want to stay in the trade but aren't happy...and feel you've been wronged, submit a well-written and supported grievance. 
 

This is part of the problem right here, we shouldn't ever get to the point "oh you want more money, CT to this trade", Why should that culture in the CF even exist? we have a two tiered pay system. Personally I don't care whether you work on the Engine of a Leopard, F-18, or a Halifax, you should all make the same money. Spec pay has created a monster that is on one side resentment and envy from those that don't get it. On the other side a culture of entitlement by some individuals with spec pay that defend their spec pay but don't really offer reasoning why X is better then Y.

That is my 2 cents.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline upandatom

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 6,475
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 434
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #383 on: January 13, 2015, 16:53:28 »
This is part of the problem right here, we shouldn't ever get to the point "oh you want more money, CT to this trade", Why should that culture in the CF even exist? we have a two tiered pay system. Personally I don't care whether you work on the Engine of a Leopard, F-18, or a Halifax, you should all make the same money. Spec pay has created a monster that is on one side resentment and envy from those that don't get it. On the other side a culture of entitlement by some individuals with spec pay that defend their spec pay but don't really offer reasoning why X is better then Y.

That is my 2 cents.

Probably becasue the Technical ability, skillset, and knowledge of a member that is required to repair Nav-aids, keep communications up and running for strategic and tactical comms, repair ground, air and naval weapons targeting systems, components in electronics, ensure naval Satcomm, radars,  and  fault finding those systems is far above the norm in some positions in the CAF. The amount and cost of training those soldiers, seaman and airmen is high, and you cant dump them into a technical position while their civilian counterparts get paid 10-40k more a year, and on top of that expect them to deal with the military extra such as constant deployments, time away from home etc.
In my trade, it took me 2 years to get wualified and out the door. I have friends from basic that were in for the same amount of time that were qualified, out the door and on tour while I was still being trained. Get paid for what you know. The same way a doctor gets paid more then a dentist in your mentality. They are both important for your health, just one gets paid more because they know more.



If you had somewhat of an educated response, you would know there is more then one Spec Pay incentive level, there is PLD, LDA, and Sea Pay, TD Pay, various amounts of fringe pay benefits one can receive if in the CAF.
I am McLovin

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 214,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,612
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #384 on: January 13, 2015, 17:23:15 »
This is part of the problem right here, we shouldn't ever get to the point "oh you want more money, CT to this trade",

EVERY single person who joins as an NCM, signs the line agreeing to "X" trade and knows what they are going to be paid.  If they don't research, I can't help that.  IF they are picking a trade solely because it is Spec Pay...I think that is a mistake.  If you are telling me that say, a postal clerk has the same responsibility I have, and the same requirements, you are missing something.  They don't. 

Quote
Why should that culture in the CF even exist?

It shouldn't.  Cooks, clerks, etc shouldn't complain about not getting spec pay because they didn't join a trade deemed a Specialist trade.  Can it be more simple?

Quote
we have a two tiered pay system.

Actually its more than 2 tiers.  We have NCM, NCM Spec trades, Officers, Officers specialty trades (ever take a look what a Med O Major makes??), and then we have Reg Force, and PRES Cl A and Cl B.  Doesn't that make you feel better?

Look, I am Spec 1 and the lowest paid trade on my crew (everyone else is Spec 2 or Officers).  I don't feel any 'resentment'; I picked my trade, knowing it was what it is pay-wise.  I don't have the same responsibility as the FE, or the Pilot.  I shouldn't expect (and I don't) the same pay simply 'because we are all on the same aircraft'.

Quote
Personally I don't care whether you work on the Engine of a Leopard, F-18, or a Halifax, you should all make the same money.

If the engine on a leopard breaks down, the tracks stop turning.  In combat that is BAD; in peacetime in Canada, anywhere other than the live 2-way range, it's an inconvenience. 

If the engines on the F-18 stop...training, peacetime, whatever.  ITS BAD. 

Quote
Spec pay has created a monster that is on one side resentment and envy from those that don't get it. On the other side a culture of entitlement by some individuals with spec pay that defend their spec pay but don't really offer reasoning why X is better then Y.

That is my 2 cents.

When was this 'monster' created; my dad was a FE and made spec pay, and he retired in '81.

I think this is already past the  :deadhorse: point so I'll go on read-only mode...
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 36,405
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,569
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #385 on: January 13, 2015, 17:32:10 »

If you had somewhat of an educated response, you would know there is more then one Spec Pay incentive level, there is PLD, LDA, and Sea Pay, TD Pay, various amounts of fringe pay benefits one can receive if in the CAF.

I am well aware of Spec 1, and Spec 2 pay levels, and all the extra allowances that exist in the CF. However one with Spec pay can make those same allowances, do people who get spec pay + allowances deserve it? Yes I'm not arguing that at all, I'm saying that the system as a whole is broken and needs to be reviewed. You mention how it took you two years to get trained, I know your pain, I'm a weapons tech, I watched my combat arms buddies go on tour, and be promoted long before me. Frankly Yes it annoyed me but I picked my trade, and I love my trade, should I get spec pay? Nope. Do I think all the trades that get spec pay deserve it? Nope I do not.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 214,385
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,612
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #386 on: January 13, 2015, 17:40:21 »
Do I think all the trades that get spec pay deserve it? Nope I do not.

Mind listing the ones that are spec pay that you think should not be, and why?  Maybe it we narrow the arc's here some, the thread won't be locked or circle the shyte tube.
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 36,405
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,569
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #387 on: January 13, 2015, 17:57:34 »
Mind listing the ones that are spec pay that you think should not be, and why?  Maybe it we narrow the arc's here some, the thread won't be locked or circle the shyte tube.

Sure no problem, Though I'll admit right now I don't have in depth knowledge of all these trades so just like everyone else here my opinion is open to interpretation based on facts that may be presented.

Communicator Research Operator - it's a sig op with a couple extra pieces of kit, they are mostly equipment operators, sounds like a fair bit of extra work to me. However from what I've read and heard from people it doesn't sound intensive enough to earn spec pay, I don't see a danger involved with the trade it self.

EO techs - Now while EO techs do repair & maintain very sensitive equipment its just a piece of the puzzle that if any piece doesn't work your screwed. Take a M777 for example I'm told it's mostly an EO tech job because of the electronics. Now say there is a problem with a structure of that gun or with the breach or barrel, its just as ineffective in battle as if that all mighty computer didn't work.

"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

jollyjacktar

  • Guest
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #388 on: January 13, 2015, 18:09:12 »
Comms Research is more about what you know than what you do per se.  IIRC, they do things such as learn second languages (not French/English) in order to do their jobs here and there. 

Offline Schindler's Lift

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 18,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 800
  • http://goo.gl/1E5Ez0
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #389 on: January 13, 2015, 18:17:59 »
Communicator Research Operator - it's a sig op with a couple extra pieces of kit, they are mostly equipment operators, sounds like a fair bit of extra work to me. However from what I've read and heard from people it doesn't sound intensive enough to earn spec pay, I don't see a danger involved with the trade it self.

So spec pay equates to the danger level for a job?

EO techs - Now while EO techs do repair & maintain very sensitive equipment its just a piece of the puzzle that if any piece doesn't work your screwed. Take a M777 for example I'm told it's mostly an EO tech job because of the electronics. Now say there is a problem with a structure of that gun or with the breach or barrel, its just as ineffective in battle as if that all mighty computer didn't work.

Now, i don't know what else an EO tech does but I would assume its more then M777 computers.  It would also seem to me that trained operators could swap out a barrel or conduct front line repairs to make that gun mechanically effective but without the computer it would be pretty much ineffective. 

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 168,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,973
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #390 on: January 13, 2015, 19:27:29 »
For a different perspective, this is what the Australian Defence Force has for its members:

http://www.defence.gov.au/dpe/pac/Rates.htm

All trades are paid according to their pay groups (1-10).  As an example, Pilot is 10 and Intelligence Officer is 5.  Then there are allowances, increments, etc. like the CAF.

I can assure you that I hear mumbles of discontent from various ADF trades similar to what I see on this thread.
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline sidemount

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 6,420
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 455
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #391 on: January 13, 2015, 19:40:37 »
EO techs look after every piece of optical, night vision, thermal, and surveying equipment in the army. As well as the serv kit on the coyote, turrets, power distribution.....basically anything electronic (except radios), electrical, and optical in the army.

Leadership is solving problems. The day soldiers stop bringing you their problems is the day you have stopped leading them. They have either lost confidence that you can help or concluded you do not care. Either case is a failure of leadership. - Colin Powell

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 917,985
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,153
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #392 on: January 13, 2015, 19:44:28 »
Communicator Research Operator - it's a sig op with a couple extra pieces of kit, they are mostly equipment operators, sounds like a fair bit of extra work to me. However from what I've read and heard from people it doesn't sound intensive enough to earn spec pay, I don't see a danger involved with the trade it self.

That trade was already warned that a pay review is incoming (apparently spec pay trades are supposed to be reviewed every 5 years?), and that they shouldn't bank on keeping it. I don't agree with them having it either, it has nothing to do with danger.

You're dead wrong when you think they're not employed in dangerous situations, PM me if you want further explanation.

Offline sidemount

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 6,420
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 455
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #393 on: January 13, 2015, 19:46:37 »
Pretty common for other eme trades to think EO techs dont deserve spec pay though....nothing new there.

The LCIS  guys though......man did that whole aciss thing ever screw you guys....don't know what the Sigs branch was trying to do there.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2015, 19:49:11 by sidemount »
Leadership is solving problems. The day soldiers stop bringing you their problems is the day you have stopped leading them. They have either lost confidence that you can help or concluded you do not care. Either case is a failure of leadership. - Colin Powell

Offline Schindler's Lift

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 18,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 800
  • http://goo.gl/1E5Ez0
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #394 on: January 13, 2015, 19:50:51 »
I think (and it's only just my basic understanding of the overall issue) that most people don't really understand what goes into a decision about whether or not a trade successfully can lobby for spec pay.  It seems many have a "them against us" view when it comes to one trade or another getting or not getting spec pay.  I'm sure there are some criteria somewhere that has to be met.  Just what goes into the process? 

Offline Happy Guy

  • Member
  • ****
  • 5,470
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 134
  • Retirement is just around the corner!
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #395 on: January 13, 2015, 20:11:48 »
The request and justification for spec pay by any trade that feels that they deserve it has been  a tough nut to crack for years.  Every trade within the CAF can make a case for spec pay.  All technical trades (repair of equipment) firmly believe that their highly specialized skills, some of which are in high demand by the civilian world, is sufficient justification.
A cook, sup tech, MSE OP, Tfc tech, RMS clk all have specialized skills too.  What do you think it requires to run a major base kitchen that feeds hundreds of people everyday?  What about the skills required to managed a supply system or drive a large tractor trailer?  Is not a competent RMS clk worth their weight in gold?
I do not have an answer to this except that it appears that if a trade is in high demand by the civilian world then it seems that DND answers with spec pay to compete.  What I guess what I'm trying to say is that everyone needs everyone else to make the system work.  Does this justifies only a few select trades get spec pay or the team? 

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 444,370
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,344
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #396 on: January 13, 2015, 20:43:52 »
I realize that introducing facts to a discussion on the internet is a fools errand, but here are two of the FAQs from the intranet site of the DIrectorate of Pay Policy Development


Can you give us the basic structure of CF Pay?

COMPARABILITY

Following unification of the Canadian Forces (CF) in the mid-60s, the Department of National Defence and the Treasury Board Secretariat adopted the principle of comparability between the CF and the Public Service (PS). There were two major reasons for instituting comparability - that CF members would benefit from the results of collective bargaining and that the federal government acted as the employer for both groups.

TEAM CONCEPT

As is the case in most militaries, the CF uses a rank-based "team concept" or institutional approach to determine pay. In this methodology, the average value of the work performed by all members of a specific rank level is considered in developing pay. This is quite different from the more common Public Service method in which an individual is paid the evaluated worth for the specific position they are filling. In exceptional cases, market factors force the CF to consider a handful of military occupations, such as doctors, dentists, lawyers and some high-tech trades, separate from the majority of CF members. However, within these special occupations, the "team concept" is applied.

Given the nature of the military's work, the "team concept" makes a lot of sense and it is used to the maximum extent possible. However, the use of the "team concept" presents some challenges when comparing the CF to non-military organizations that use an occupational or job-specific approach.

TOTAL COMPENSATION METHODOLOGY

In the late 70s, Treasury Board directed that the Department adopt Total Compensation (TC) analysis, which was also being developed for use in collective bargaining with the PS unions. Treasury Board wanted to ensure that the full value of the compensation and benefits made available by the employer to federal public servants was considered in negotiations. The methodology includes salary, but also evaluates benefits such as pensions, severance pay, acting pay, overtime and medical and dental services, as well as "time not worked", annual leave and sick leave being two examples.

The objective of this form of analysis, therefore, is to compare the compensation and benefits available to one group of employees to the compensation and benefits of another group. The end result provides a net value, expressed in terms of the dollars paid per hour actually worked, for the first group of employees, as compared to the net value of the dollars paid per hour actually worked for the second group. The warranted pay increase or decrease in a given year is the percentage difference between these two values. For the military, two TC analyses are conducted: one for general service officers and one for non-commissioned members. "Comparability" is considered to be achieved if the CF dollar per hour worked is equal to the PS dollar per hour worked.

The Military Factor

It is important to note that the TC analyses, as applied to the CF, also provide latitude to determine the dollar value of the unique aspects of CF service. The most obvious example is the Military Factor, which values the major characteristics of military service. Although the unique aspects of military service such as Code of Service Discipline, separation from family and posting turbulence are not easily quantified, the Military Factor was originally valued at 4% of salary for all non-commissioned members and general service officers. As of April 1, 1999, the Military Factor was improved to 7.5% for non-commissioned members and 6.5% for general service officers. On 1 April 2006, the Military Factor for general service officers and pilots was further increased to 7.5%. These recent increases were in recognition of a higher operational tempo and resulting increases in the incidence of separation, and a new component (Personal Limitations and Liabilities), which further recognizes the implications inherent in the military system of unlimited liability. Another less obvious example is the fact that CF members are not eligible for overtime. To adjust for this in the TC analyses, values of 6% of salary for non-commissioned members and 4% of salary for general service officers are used.

"Comparability", therefore, is not a case of making one rate of pay equal to another. Instead, a "comparability" shortfall is the amount of increase to CF pay that is needed to equalize the bottom line (dollars per hour worked) between the CF and the PS values, but only after considering all salary and applicable benefits including unique CF conditions of service.

PAY GROUPS

Non-Commissioned Members

Non-commissioned members are paid rates of pay determined through TC analysis. Within each rank there are a number of Pay Increments (PI), which represent automatic annual increases given in recognition of advancements in experience, skill and knowledge. As well, there are three sub-groups of pay into which non-commissioned member trade groups are slotted. These sub-groups are Standard, Specialist 1 and Specialist 2 and pay rates vary in each sub-group. The Specialist 1 and Specialist 2 sub-groups, which include trades such as Fire Control Systems Technicians, Flight Engineers, Biomedical Electronics Technicians, and Marine Engineering Artificers, comprise jobs which are highly complex in nature and whose skills are in high demand in the private sector.

General Service Officers

General service officers are all officers below the rank of colonel in all occupation groups except for pilots and specialist officers (legal, medical and dental officers). General service officers pay rates are also determined through TC analysis and they receive pay increment level increases just like non-commissioned members. One significant difference is that there are often more pay increment levels for officer ranks than there are for non-commissioned member ranks, on the basis that it takes longer for officers to gather all the experience, skill and knowledge required for their rank. Hence, they must wait longer than non-commissioned members to receive the job rate (maximum) for their rank.

Pilots

Pilots are paid general service officer rates of pay plus a pilot differential that is in recognition of private sector market factors.

Senior Officers (Colonels and above)

Officers, other than legal, medical and dental officers, at the rank of colonel and above are paid based upon direct benchmarks to the Public Service's Executive Category. Job analysis is used to establish the benchmarks and after that they receive the same pay and benefits as their PS counterparts. The base pay for Colonels and above includes a 6.5% Military Factor and a fixed percentage factor in recognition of the performance pay paid to the Public Service Executive Group. The value of this performance factor is the same for all officers at each rank regardless of individual performance in order to reflect the CF's Team Concept approach to pay.

Legal Officers

All CF legal officer (except military judges) rates of pay are based on direct benchmarks to the Public Service's Law Group. In addition, legal officers receive the same military factor as senior officers as analysis has proven that they are subjected to similar conditions as the general service officers. Legal officers also receive a performance pay factor in their base pay.

Military Judges

Military judges are paid based upon the recommendations of the Military Judges' Compensation Committee and the subsequent approval of both the Minister of National Defence and the Treasury Board. To ensure the independence of the military judges, their performance is not assessed and, hence, they do not receive performance pay.

Medical And Dental Officers

As of April 1, 1999, medical and dental officers' total compensation is determined in relation to private practice practitioners. Those below the rank of colonel receive the same military factor as senior and legal officers. Medical and dental officers in the ranks of captain and above receive a Special Military Differential that recognizes the uniqueness of military service.


Why do non-commissioned members have fewer pay increments than officers?

The Canadian Forces pay system is based on the principle of comparability with the Public Service. To that end, a series of Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) approved salary benchmarks are used to develop the CF rates of pay.

The NCM benchmarks fix a lower and an upper limit. At the lower end, the Cpl benchmark matches CF occupations with PS trades at the journeyman level and include a military factor. The upper limit, Chief Warrant Officer Pay increment (PI) 4, is pegged as a Captain PI 5/6. Between the lower and upper limits, all ranks from Corporal to CWO, six in all, must be accommodated and a maximum salary cap given to each one. The pay structure developed for NCMs must provide reasonable salary progression in the form of pay increments and must provide for reasonable increases on promotion. Given the overall size of the NCM salary range, and the number of ranks involved, the number of pay increments at each rank level must be limited if the amount of each increment is to be of significance. The number of NCM pay increments is presently set at four. Ten pay increments, as there are for Captains, could easily be established mathematically, but annual increases would be so small as to be meaningless. Moreover, the sooner an individual reaches his/her pay ceiling at a given rank, the better off he or she will be financially.

By comparison, the general service officer (GSO) Pay Structure is developed through a comparison to approximately fifteen groups in the Scientific, Professional, and Administrative and Foreign Service categories of occupations in the PS. The result is a relatively broad salary range for each of the GSO Ranks, particularly at Captain, that reflects the scope of jobs, training, experience, responsibilities, and career progression at each rank level. The number of PIs for each rank has been established to account for these factors. It would be possible to reduce the number of PIs at each rank, but this would mean larger pay increment amounts or a larger salary gap between ranks, both unjustifiable based on the rank structure of the CF.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Schindler's Lift

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 18,435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 800
  • http://goo.gl/1E5Ez0
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #397 on: January 13, 2015, 20:52:39 »
The request and justification for spec pay by any trade that feels that they deserve it has been  a tough nut to crack for years.  Every trade within the CAF can make a case for spec pay.  All technical trades (repair of equipment) firmly believe that their highly specialized skills, some of which are in high demand by the civilian world, is sufficient justification.
A cook, sup tech, MSE OP, Tfc tech, RMS clk all have specialized skills too.  What do you think it requires to run a major base kitchen that feeds hundreds of people everyday?  What about the skills required to managed a supply system or drive a large tractor trailer?  Is not a competent RMS clk worth their weight in gold?
I do not have an answer to this except that it appears that if a trade is in high demand by the civilian world then it seems that DND answers with spec pay to compete.  What I guess what I'm trying to say is that everyone needs everyone else to make the system work.  Does this justifies only a few select trades get spec pay or the team?

I think civilian demand plays into it but I know from my own trades perspective it took more then that.  At the time we got spec pay we were down in numbers due to civilian police departments "poaching" MPs or many just leaving to go over because of pay.  At the same time though, our getting spec pay was not just due to retention.  There was a trade off in that we now require our new recruits to have a college diploma upon enrollment.  If we no longer had that requirement we'd lose the spec pay for sure.  Yes, retention was part of the problem but it certainly was not the issue that resulted in spec pay.  I'll have to dig around the network tomorrow to see what I can find on the topic I guess.

Offline upandatom

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 6,475
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 434
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #398 on: January 14, 2015, 13:33:17 »
I am well aware of Spec 1, and Spec 2 pay levels, and all the extra allowances that exist in the CF. However one with Spec pay can make those same allowances, do people who get spec pay + allowances deserve it? Yes I'm not arguing that at all, I'm saying that the system as a whole is broken and needs to be reviewed. You mention how it took you two years to get trained, I know your pain, I'm a weapons tech, I watched my combat arms buddies go on tour, and be promoted long before me. Frankly Yes it annoyed me but I picked my trade, and I love my trade, should I get spec pay? Nope. Do I think all the trades that get spec pay deserve it? Nope I do not.

Ill agree that not all that get it deserve it, and there are some that dont get it that do (Med Tech is a prime example)

But a big thing is, positional. The job you are doing at that time. Does that deserve Spec Pay? Sometimes a spec pay trade position doesnt deserve spec pay, yes they know how to do the job, but are they doing/using their technical experitise?
You cant start telling people in this position you will get spec and in this one you wont. You will have people fist fighting for positions.

EO techs do deserve it, (same situation stands as some positions are alot more technical then others) but i have seen some EO techs do some very precise technicial work in 3rd line repair.

Weapons techs, possibly too, there is the argument there(precision required and knowledge, small arms and larger weapons systems)
 
same as mat techs when comparing welders pay in the oil fields.

The TB has spec pay so weighed down with red tape it possibly costs more to run it through the TB then actually just granting and paying the trades that have it.
I am McLovin

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 207,730
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,755
Re: I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)
« Reply #399 on: January 14, 2015, 14:08:12 »
You cant start telling people in this position you will get spec and in this one you wont. You will have people fist fighting for positions.
Why not?  We do it with LDA and some recepients of the allowance don't even have to spend time in the field to get it.