Search results

Is it the one with the wings off the badge or the bird completely inside the border of the pin?

Well, that would depend on the RSM - not all are created equal. Adj has literally nothing to do with boots. Unless you are talking about a Warrant Officer (WO/Adj)...

Yes sir.

It's funny because there are many who absolutley love those socks! I was never gone on them myself. And I had access to thousands! I am a white tube-sock kinda guy.

Unspeakable you say? Socks you say?? Brown you say? I may (hey that rhymes with say) know a guy...

Or even a nice purple-ish blue for the flyboys! (and girls... flygirls too!)

Actually, Ariconius, after looking at your profile, I'M not so sure... you list your rank as a recruit. Not sure that a "big" lump sum as you put it would be headed your way...

This whole pay increase topic? Where have you been? Ok, so after reading this thread, and probably dozens of media blogs and social media... are you sure now?

No answer there - all I can say is that custom fitting is / was not cost efficient. 1200.00 for a pair of boots? With the mondo-point sizing, there are over 70 sizes in one boot style. That said, most soldiers should fit. There are definitely those who won't (we are not all the same dimensions)...

It'll never happen. And the only way to prove either one of right / wrong is wait. But I'm my own opinion, the elusive "boot allowance" has been discussed and shot down several times. It will never see the light of day. Right now we are emptying the shelves at both depots of all boots in a...

Ok I know this is difficult for me I promise this will be my last post on the topic as I just don't seem to be getting it... I want to figure out where I am going wrong on this math (it's not about how much I will see anymore it's about trying to understand this!!) Here is what I am doing is as...

What on earth ... where are you getting these percentages? I'm by far the greatest at math (3 x 6 = blue) but I read your mathplay link and I see it differently - as in exactly what the link says... a 1.25% raise at year one is still a 1.25% raise at year 4... you just add the 1.25 from year 1...

Ahhh now THAT clears it right up for me.

You are not making one bit of sense to me. This is what I see you doing: 2014 = A 2015 = A + B 2016 = A + B + C Total A + (A+B) + (A+B+C) = Back pay Let's say that no matter what, our annual increase is roughly 950.00 for each of the three years. 2014 = 950.00 2015 = 950.00 + 950.00 2016 =...

Nope. You're wrong. You are adding your 2014 total back pay 3 times, 2015 twice. You don't get triple 2014 in 2016... Look at it again - at 6200 a month (in 2014), should be 6277. So, 77.50 multiplied by 12 months equals 930.00. Now you ADD the 77.50 to your 6200 to begin 2015. In 2015 you are...

As long as my math is correct (this is the caveat of course) I calculate that you would multiply 15 by how many months you have been receiving LDA. Example is two years. You have been in receipt of LDA for 24 months: 24 X 15.00 = 360.00 LDA increased by roughly 15 bucks a month over all...

Everyone seems to be agreeing on this math, however I seem to be a bit lost... I get a gross lump sum payment of 1900.00. Albeit I am not including all of 2016 as I retired in May 2016, but one year would not add 4 thousand dollars to my total!!! Either I am doing it wrong or you are doing it...

And this is how things go from bad to worse for those of us behind the counter - calling a supply tech an "ignorant a**h***" may be a little harsh and premature. I'm not saying there are no dicks at Clothing Stores, however when I read the OP's comment for the reason for the boots being too big...

So, just a thought about the pending legalization of recreational use marijuana... if Health Canada will eventually assign it a DIN, can it (should it) still be used recreationally? Is there such a thing as recreational codeine or morphine use? Recreational Cialis??

Now, back to your regularly scheduled thread...