• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

2018 pay increase?

NavyShooter

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,309
Points
1,090
I'd rather have the money on time....when it comes as backpay, it is a nice chunk, however, not getting an annual increase along the way means that each year our salaries lose buying power against the economy due to inflation.  Additionally, we don't see any interest included with the money we receive as backpay, so basically, you're losing money.

*shrug*  I'd rather see an annual cost of living increase, but understand that it's not how things work in this world.  We have been tied (in a way) to PSAC for our pay raises.

NS
 

Pusser

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
430
NavyShooter said:
*shrug*  I'd rather see an annual cost of living increase, but understand that it's not how things work in this world.  We have been tied (in a way) to PSAC for our pay raises.

Actually, cost of living is the only thing our pay increases ever are.  Annual increases to pay rates are never about "attaboys" or rewards for loyalty and good service.  The only true pay "raises" (i.e. rewards) we ever get are upon increases in incentive levels or actual promotion.

We are not tied "in a way" to the Public Service (it's not just PSAC).  Our pay is absolutely tied to that of the Public Service!  This is actually a good thing (in my view) as the Public Service unions do all the work on negotiating the increases and then a comparability formula is applied to determine our new pay rates (which are generally higher).  So whereas Public Servants may have to go on strike to get a fair increase, we do not.  Sadly, strikes, which could cynically be described as beneficial to us, may not always benefit the Public Servants on the picket line.  Sometimes, the amount of money they get in the settlement doesn't make up for what they lost while not getting paid during a strike. 
 

CountDC

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
28
Points
580
agree fully - rather have it every year in smaller amounts than a large lump sum that skewers my income for that one year. For us this results in a loss on certain federal/provincial benefits that are tied to the family income for the year.

Always support the PS in fighting the good fight so we get more.  ;D
 

Piece of Cake

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
110
NavyShooter said:
I'd rather have the money on time....when it comes as backpay, it is a nice chunk, however, not getting an annual increase along the way means that each year our salaries lose buying power against the economy due to inflation.
Not only a loss in buying power, but if the CAF wants to be competitive in recruitment, then it needs to offer pay that is adjusted yearly to the CPI.
 

Lumber

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
177
Points
680
Piece of Cake said:
Not only a loss in buying power, but if the CAF wants to be competitive in recruitment, then it needs to offer pay that is adjusted yearly to the CPI.

With the upcoming increase in minimum wage in Ontario to $15/hr, PRes OS/Ptes and NCdt/OCdts will now be making less than minimum wage.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,135
Points
1,090
Lumber said:
With the upcoming increase in minimum wage in Ontario to $15/hr, PRes OS/Ptes and NCdt/OCdts will now be making less than minimum wage.

Minimum wage: 40 hrs @ $15 = $600 / week

PRes Pte R: 7 days @ 96.06 = $672.42 / week.  If on course away from home, R&Q included.



 

George Wallace

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
4
Points
430
Lumber said:
With the upcoming increase in minimum wage in Ontario to $15/hr, PRes OS/Ptes and NCdt/OCdts will now be making less than minimum wage.

Are you suggesting that there is a Kathleen Wynne/Ontario Liberal Party conspiracy to demilitarize the Province of Ontario?  :stirpot:
 

kratz

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
122
Points
880
Lumber said:
With the upcoming increase in minimum wage in Ontario to $15/hr, PRes OS/Ptes and NCdt/OCdts will now be making less than minimum wage.

$96.06 pay + $8.65 PILL = $104.71 per day / 7.5hrs = $13.96 per hr for Class A OS/AB + additional benefits (the value of SDB, Reserve Dental Plan and Education Reimbursement). I think the pay and benefits package is competitive for entry level training positions.
 

ModlrMike

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
868
Points
960
kratz said:
$96.06 pay + $8.65 PILL = $104.71 per day / 7.5hrs = $13.96 per hr for Class A OS/AB + additional benefits (the value of SDB, Reserve Dental Plan and Education Reimbursement). I think the pay and benefits package is competitive for entry level training positions.

It's actually worse when you frame it IAW the half day / full day format:

For a half day you get 48.03 + 4.32 = 52.35, then divide that by 6 hours and you get $8.725 per hour. Worse yet again the longer you go over the six hour mark.
 

kratz

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
122
Points
880
[quote author=ModlrMike]]
It's actually worse when you frame it IAW the half day / full day format:

For a half day you get 48.03 + 4.32 = 52.35, then divide that by 6 hours and you get $8.725 per hour. Worse yet again the longer you go over the six hour mark.
[/quote]

Yikes. At that metric, less than 6 hours, starting at PO2 / Sgt (IPC 1) + PILL starts to break even with $15 hr.
With most PRes quitting within 5 years, the majority would never see a break even point.
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
1,747
Points
1,060
I get $8.21 an hour if you count a 24 hour day we're all liable to recall on. You can make the numbers mean anything, and reservists are no where close to being underpaid.
 

Piece of Cake

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
110
PuckChaser said:
I get $8.21 an hour if you count a 24 hour day we're all liable to recall on. You can make the numbers mean anything, and reservists are no where close to being underpaid.

I would argue that reservists are underpaid by 15 per cent.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,135
Points
1,090
Piece of Cake said:
I would argue that reservists are underpaid by 15 per cent.

Class A, B or C?  COATS, PRes, Rangers or Supp Res?
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
1,747
Points
1,060
Piece of Cake said:
I would argue that reservists are underpaid by 15 per cent.

Endure the full hardships of RegF members and they'll get paid the same. PRes members get that 15% back when they're on Cl C, doing the same job as the RegF. That's a whole other ball of wax though.  :eek:ff topic:
 

Piece of Cake

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
110
dapaterson said:
Class A, B or C?  COATS, PRes, Rangers or Supp Res?

Class A and Class B.  Can't speak about the Rangers as I'm not aware how they are paid.

Class C should be the pay standard for Class A and B reservists.

As an aside, I found this interesting.

http://www.ombudsman-veterans.gc.ca/eng/blog/post/286


 

George Wallace

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
4
Points
430
PuckChaser said:
Endure the full hardships of RegF members and they'll get paid the same. PRes members get that 15% back when they're on Cl C, doing the same job as the RegF. That's a whole other ball of wax though.  :eek:ff topic:

With that attitude, the Reserves will abandon ship and flip burgers at Mickey D's.
 
Top