Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 12,144
- Points
- 1,260
E.R. Campbell said:I'm not "advocating" much of anything except that I think ~ I'm sure ~ that, after 45 years, a pay structure review is past due, but:
My opinion is that leadership and/or technical management/supervision skills ought to be prerequisites for promotion to any rank ~ which is why I find favour with the US Army's
specialist grades and with our trade groups. Leaders ought to be paid more than specialists. Combat leadership, in F Ech or even A2 Ech, exacts a physical and mental toll, it ought to be rewarded.
It is also my opinion that we ought to be prepared to pay a premium for certain high skill and high (civilian) value trades and specialities ~ we are in a "business," of sorts, after all.
In a long career I was never upset that people who flew aircraft or sailed ships (especially ships that went under the water intentionally) or kept me healthy were paid more than me. I was, equally, content, that an
officer of the same rank and classification as me who made his living sleeping on the ground while I slept in my own warm, dry (accompanied) bed was getting an allowance.
I believed, when I served, and I still believe now, that officers who are Commanding Officers or who command formations (MOGs, brigades, wings) should be paid a command allowance. I know that along
with the many pleasures and privileges of command there are costs - monetary and other.
My list could go on and on and on ... which is why you want a team - military and civilian and the latter from government and the private sector - to do a formal, determined and complete review.
ER I like where your headed with this. But just to make sure my giprock brain is onside with you, are you saying Rank+UIC+Trade+Responsibility Level = Pay Rate ?