A Swerve On Leave/leadership- from "CAF Members File Suit"

[dapaterson]

Few other employers will pay someone with a high-school education and five years experience a salary north of $60k, plus allowances, plus med and dent, plus dependent med and dent, plus a defined benefit pension plan where the employer pays over half the cost, plus five weeks paid leave, plus additional leave, plus ongoing professional training (all paid).

 

[dapaterson]

What’s ‘pier jumping’?

Welcome back from six months at sea in HMCS Whatever. Don't bother to head home, just grab your bags and go to HMCS Whenever for another exciting five months at sea.

 

[brihard]

Ew. Sounds like recruiting for the Coast Guard.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

For those wondering why this hasn't been split yet, it's because compared to the old forum it's a pain the ass to do it. Maybe tonight when one of us has a tall drink and the time.
Old forum I could do a split and move individual posts back and forth in my sleep.
Bruce

 

[Halifax Tar]

Few other employers will pay someone with a high-school education and five years experience a salary north of $60k, plus allowances, plus med and dent, plus dependent med and dent, plus a defined benefit pension plan where the employer pays over half the cost, plus five weeks paid leave, plus additional leave, plus ongoing professional training (all paid).

Well if our manning is any indication those HS educated folks are willing to go elsewhere for regardless of that.

I would argue the sentiment in your post is outdated and out of touch.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

On the other hand few employers would have allowed extremely well paid upper management to screw up the whole organization like they have and not walked the whole lot of them out.....

 

[Navy_Pete]

Few other employers will pay someone with a high-school education and five years experience a salary north of $60k, plus allowances, plus med and dent, plus dependent med and dent, plus a defined benefit pension plan where the employer pays over half the cost, plus five weeks paid leave, plus additional leave, plus ongoing professional training (all paid).

Few other employers would invest that much in people to create specialists in niche areas and then run them until they break. It takes years and millions of dollars to train up sailors to OFP.

The benefits/salaries are competitive for the skill set people end up with, but when the big giant heads won't say 'no, we can't do all that' those benefits pretty quickly outweigh the costs, and it's been running like this for over a decade, with things rapidly tipping past the point of total failure.

Even sitting in a cubicle I have a running list of things we just can't get to, and triaging even safety related items, so it's not just random paperwork not getting done.

 

[MilEME09]

On the other hand few employers would have allowed extremely well paid upper management to screw up the whole organization like they have and not walked the whole lot of them out.....

Private businesses tend to show more accountability when it costs them money. The CAF has no input financially for government coffers, so what's the measure of success? If we treated the CAF like a business I'm sure a lot would suddenly work, but a lot also wouldn't.

 

[OldSolduer]

Private businesses tend to show more accountability when it costs them money. The CAF has no unput financially for government coffers, so what's the measure of success? If we treated the CAF like a business I'm sure a lot would suddenly work, but a lot also wouldn't.

In the early 90s "do more with less" was the mantra and DELEGAT was the flavour of the day.

The CAF is not a business but it should manage finances prudently.

 

[dapaterson]

Big Giant Head issues are not solved by making it rain Bordens, but on improvements by educating and if necessary eliminating Big Giant Heads.

If your leadership treats all subordinates as disposable, that's not a compensation issue, it's a leadership issue.

 

[Happy Guy]

Few other employers will pay someone with a high-school education and five years experience a salary north of $60k, plus allowances, plus med and dent, plus dependent med and dent, plus a defined benefit pension plan where the employer pays over half the cost, plus five weeks paid leave, plus additional leave, plus ongoing professional training (all paid).

I concur with this statement.

I used to work at CMP where there were many quality of life initiatives being studied by quite a large number of groups, with input from the Environments. One of the biggest issues is the managing the expectations of the CAF. In brief, the individual CAF member expects more than their predecessors.

The very senior CAF leadership has to reconcile operational demands with:

• balancing the CAF's capabilities within the expectations and changing needs of the Govt and more importantly the public.
• providing sufficient qualified instructors dedicated for training - hopefully production equals or is greater than releases. DND/CAF MUST re-examine manning levels at the national schools and their infrastructure. Do we do another PAUSE to allow trg output and unit lve/rest to catch up?
• family time / leave at time they desire and not when it is convenient for the CAF. I only noticed this problem after I got married and started having children. Continual taskings, training and ops tours. My time from in the CAF mid 1990s to mid 2010 was a blur. The CAF down sized but the taskings and ops grew.
• sufficient pay and benefits for the individual AND FAMILY while keeping in line with the Treasury Board regulations. The CAF, now, is significantly better paid than it used be and there are now more benefits than ever before for Reg F. What now needs to be done is look at how DND/CAF can improve the pay and benefits for the Res F - primarily Cl A.

It is much harder now to be a senior Leader in the CAF now and this is not including the sexual harassment / misconduct situation ongoing now.

I'm so glad that I'm retired now.

Sorry for going off tangent.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Big Giant Head issues are not solved by making it rain Bordens, but on improvements by educating and if necessary eliminating Big Giant Heads.

If your leadership treats all subordinates as disposable, that's not a compensation issue, it's a leadership issue.

I haven't heard people arguing for money, at least I haven't. Its a about time and a more equitable work/family balance.

 

[dapaterson]

Leave is part of the compensation package. But the design of things like leave always includes some assumptions... And 210+ days at sea in a year, year after year, was probably outside those assumptions.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Leave is part of the compensation package. But the design of things like leave always includes some assumptions... And 210+ days at sea in a year, year after year, was probably outside those assumptions.

There's more to leave than your annual allotment. Also the Navy has always had massive amounts of time away from home.

A simple equitable scale would suffice.

Every week gets you a Day and add any stat days you miss as well.

 

[Pelorus]

Ew. Sounds like recruiting for the Coast Guard.

Except that it's nearly impossible to transfer your qualifications to be employed at even a reasonably similar level of expertise or seniority. Unlike the RCAF which is answerable to some extent to Nav Canada and civilian aviation rules for individual qualifications, the RCN is completely exempt from civilian standards.

 

[Good2Golf]

…Unlike the RCAF which is answerable to some extent to Nav Canada and civilian aviation rules for individual qualifications, the RCN is completely exempt from civilian standards.

Would be interested to know which of the CARs that DND is answerable too for individual qualifications?

 

[Furniture]

Would be interested to know which of the CARs that DND is answerable too for individual qualifications?

Based on my experience with Nav Canada, TC, and ECCC none...

That said, we do try to align out standards with theirs as often as we can.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Except that it's nearly impossible to transfer your qualifications to be employed at even a reasonably similar level of expertise or seniority. Unlike the RCAF which is answerable to some extent to Nav Canada and civilian aviation rules for individual qualifications, the RCN is completely exempt from civilian standards.

Not answerable, at all, to TC. The MND is the responsible Minister for all military aeronautics matters. Says so in Para 3(1)(b) of the Aeronautics Act.

But thanks for coming out.

 

[Mick]

Not answerable, at all, to TC. The MND is the responsible Minister for all military aeronautics matters. Says so in Para 3(1)(b) of the Aeronautics Act.

But thanks for coming out.

While "answerable" is obviously the wrong word, the Canadian Aviation Regulations do specify in Standard 421.30 (8), 421.31 (8), 421.34 (7), and 421.35 (7) how military experience is credited towards rotary- and fixed-wing Commercial and Airline Transport pilot licenses, although TC written exams are still required in some cases.

Standard 421 - Flight Crew Permits, Licences and Ratings - Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs)

Standard 421 for flights crew permits, licences and ratings for Canadian Aviation Regulations (SOR 96-433)

tc.canada.ca

Looking further down the list, it looks like FE experience is also similarly credited in Standard 421.37 (8).

Standard 422 - Air Traffic Controller Licences and Ratings - Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs)

tc.canada.ca

Looking quickly at Standard 422.04, dealing with ATC, it doesn't appear any credit is specified for CAF ATC experience specifically, although the standard notes that applicants shall have "successfully completed ATC training courses administered by an institution that is recognized by the Minister as being qualified to administer such training" etc.

Maybe someone here knows if CAF ATC training is considered "recognized" in that last quote.

Apologies for the derail.

 

[kev994]

While "answerable" is obviously the wrong word, the Canadian Aviation Regulations do specify in Standard 421.30 (8), 421.31 (8), 421.34 (7), and 421.35 (7) how military experience is credited towards rotary- and fixed-wing Commercial and Airline Transport pilot licenses, although TC written exams are still required in some cases.

Standard 421 - Flight Crew Permits, Licences and Ratings - Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs)

Standard 421 for flights crew permits, licences and ratings for Canadian Aviation Regulations (SOR 96-433)

tc.canada.ca

Looking further down the list, it looks like FE experience is also similarly credited in Standard 421.37 (8).

Standard 422 - Air Traffic Controller Licences and Ratings - Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs)

tc.canada.ca

Looking quickly at Standard 422.04, dealing with ATC, it doesn't appear any credit is specified for CAF ATC experience specifically, although the standard notes that applicants shall have "successfully completed ATC training courses administered by an institution that is recognized by the Minister as being qualified to administer such training" etc.

Maybe someone here knows if CAF ATC training is considered "recognized" in that last quote.

Apologies for the derail.

ATC gets poached like crazy by Nav Can.