Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,921
- Points
- 1,260
I just mean the rates. Not that all taxes go to Ont.
Allowances - Post Living Differential (PLD) [MERGED]
- Thread starter Sub_Guy
- Start date
I just mean the rates. Not that all taxes go to Ont.
- Reaction score
- 7,519
- Points
- 1,310
Yes. And the RCMP in certain postings, as well as
CBSA, Corrections, CCG, and other federal agencies that require their folks to move due to needs of the GoC.
We get screwed over because we're the largest Department, as well as the one that costs the most in every aspect. Department of Fisheries, CRA, and CSIS don't need multi billion dollar aircraft or fleets of armoured vehicles to maintain.
Having a standing military isn't cheap, but alas, we have maintained the militia myth for 200 years and thus see successive governments
and TBS roll their eyes and grudgingly open the purse strings when it's the absolute last resort.
Canadians want the butter, but also the money for the butter to be spent elsewhere.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,921
- Points
- 1,260
I think OGDs have different IR type programs too dont they ?
You’re probably thinking of provisions of the NJC Isolated Posts and Government Housing Directive. There’s a provision for Living Cost Differential (“this place is expensive” allowance), and a separate provision for government owned housing. Those living in government housing pay rent and utilities (not that high, but also quality usually isn’t that great).
The principles of IPGHD are aimed at being able to provide housing in isolated/remote locations. I think the Mounties use it most, but probably also CAF in Yellowknife, CBSA, and some other federal employees keeping a foot on the ground out in the hinterlands.
CAF is dealing with much greater scale; housing solutions that work for four RCMP officers posted to Fort Mosquito Hill may not necessarily work for a squadron’s worth of RCAF in Comox.
IMHO, get CAF back to having adequate housing for members, justified as a necessary measure to assure CAF’s ability to maintain a force that can defend Canada and its national interests. Nothing wrong with charging reasonable rent for that.
- Reaction score
- 6,969
- Points
- 1,140
I agree, but given the state of many PMQs, and base housing on many American bases, that might not be a realistic solution. The GoC/CAF might build the houses/apartments, but they will continuously fail to properly maintain them until they are full of mould, falling apart, and nobody is willing to live in them.
I think a mix of base housing (maintained), and a PLD system for those that choose to live on the economy is a better solution. It would protect the Jr. members, and those who choose to have larger families from not being able to afford a place to live, but still encourage members to participate in the local housing market, and become home owners.
More broadly, as I said earlier, this new PLD system has the potential to cause a lot of unintended consequences, so I'm very curious to see what the plan is. If it is seen as "punishing" the middle people the CAF is already short on, it could end up making things worse than they are now.
Luck of the draw on PMQs frustrates a lot of people, you could get a place with zero insulation and your oil bill is $1000 a month, or you could get the house next door, newly renovated passive home with a heat pump, heat it all winter for $100. Rent for both is the same. There’s only 3 of the latter on the entire base.
CountDC
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 462
- Points
- 960
The catch there is the "reasonable rent". Not much use when they want to charge according to the local market.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,921
- Points
- 1,260
I guess this didn't age well.
- Reaction score
- 7,519
- Points
- 1,310
Exactly.
Paying 2K to CFHA isn't much of a perk, when the alternative is paying 2K to Joe Civi. It's still 75% of Pte Bloggins' take home pay.
I thought there was a % cap on how much you could pay for a Q? 25% of your gross salary?
- Reaction score
- 7,519
- Points
- 1,310
Gross vs. Net pay get extremely finicky, depending on your geographical area and tax bracket. Net pay is a far stronger metric for QoL. When a solid chunk of your gross pay disappears in the same transaction and is unusable (EI comes to mind)... it's of very little solace to the member.
I was paying "25% of Gross Pay" on a Q here in Kingston and it was still 1500 a month for a shit hole. I ended up getting my blood money pay out from VAC, throwing it into a down payment, and now my mortgage, even with a higher rate, is cheaper per month than my Q.
Add in the fact that my Q didn't see 72K in repairs or maintenance while I lived there, definitely adds to my belief that CFHA and it's "non-profit" running is a farce.
- Reaction score
- 6,504
- Points
- 1,040
Also, local market is subject to provincial regulations and you have recourses like the tenant boards when things don't get fixed. We don't have any equivalent protection, so you get what you get, even if it is sub-standard.
- Reaction score
- 6,969
- Points
- 1,140
I wonder if the plan that had been dreamt-up by the big wigs was given the "common sense" test by someone lower down the ladder, and too many issues were found. I specify "down the ladder" because the people at the top seem really focused on S3-MS, but don't seem to have considered the people above that.
Like I mentioned earlier, the plan I was told about was based on rank, so Jr. pers would get the most benefit, and Snr. pers would get little/no benefit. That sounds great when you're a Pte making the same as your Sgt, but is a lot less great sounding when you're a Sgt dealing with new Ptes. If done improperly it could lead to an exodus of the "middle" people the CAF has already admitted being short on.
I’m curious where common conception comes from that EI is of no benefit to most military members?
- Reaction score
- 6,969
- Points
- 1,140
Because most military members draw CAF pay right up until they leave the CAF, and start paying EI premiums at their next job... The only instance I'm aware of that EI benefits CAF members is MATA/PATA.
Bingo, go it in one.
Maximum EI contributions for 2023 are $1002.45. Probably nearly every member of the military will pay that.
A couple who have a child get 15 weeks of maternity benefits and up to 40 weeks of shared parental benefits to split between them. That’s 55 weeks of EI benefits at $650 a week, or $35,750 in total benefits from EI for taking maximum parental leave for one child. At today’s dollars that’s slightly more than 35 years’ worth of EI contributions by one worker. So a couple who both work for 35 years and contribute maximum EI benefits, and who have two children for which they make full use of maternity and parental leave, will get out roughly the same or slightly more than they put in. Anyone who does the MATA/PATA three times or more is taking out considerably more than they’ll ever contribute.
Why CAF members overlook this and say EI can never be of use to them, I don’t know. (I know you didn’t take it to that extreme, but we’ve definitely all seen it).
- Reaction score
- 6,969
- Points
- 1,140
CAF members who have no children, or had them before joining(more common these days) get nothing out of it. I don't begrudge my EI premiums, but I can easily see why some CAF members do.
How is that any different than anyone else who pays EI premiums?
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,921
- Points
- 1,260
It's like you're in my head.
