HRC Challenge: Medical discharges thinning ranks & forcing unemployment

[Cloud Cover]

Some very interesting points you've got, Whiskey601.  Very interesting....

I wonder if DND is using a uniform-wearing CF legal officer to submit their arguments to the Tribunal?  It would look awfully bad on DND to try and claim that CF members are not employed by DND, while the Department is using a CF member to present its arguments to that effect.  Anyone know if DND has any lawyers that aren't military officers?

Department of Justice lawyers handle these, and typically outsource the work to a private law firm.

 

[armyvern]

DRDC, CSE, Defence Construction Canada

Uhmmm...

Communications Security Establishment (CSE), Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) also fall under the Defense Portfolio and report to the Minister of National Defense. As does that totally seperate entity from them...the Office of the Judge Advocate General (which does have civilian lawyers).

 

[284_226]

Uhmmm...

Communications Security Establishment (CSE), Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) also fall under the Defense Portfolio and report to the Minister of National Defense. As does that totally seperate entity from them...the Office of the Judge Advocate General (which does have civilian lawyers).

...Which I believe removes the significance of the link between the Public Service Employment Act and DND.  None of the organizations above are subject to the PSEA, yet are still governed by the NDA.

 

[George Wallace]

...Which I believe removes the significance of the link between the Public Service Employment Act and DND.  None of the organizations above are subject to the PSEA, yet are still governed by the NDA.

Actually, I think you are wrong and that you will find that there are Serving Military secunded to/employed many of these organizations, as well as Civil Servants.  Unless the person is a short-term contractor, they would be a Civil Servant paying into one of the several Unions they have.  Just as all civilian workers in Base CE, Base Transport, Base Supply, etc. fall under one of the Public Civil Service Unions.  It appears that you need to now figure out who is and who is not a Civil Servant, as you don't seem to have a grasp on that yet.

 

[McG]

Case in point - DRDC, CSE, Defence Construction Canada, Canada Revenue Agency...

Are these not civil servants that have been hired under authority delegated from the PSC?

 

[284_226]

The same is applicable to the public service.I am employed by the Canadian Forces NOT DND and I have known this for years...it's not a secret that there is a great distinction between the two entities and in the contracts we sign with our respective employers. After all We soldiers, sailors and airmen who signed contracts with the Canadian Forces are indeed employed by a different entity with our own unique requirements/roles and responsibilities. Ours involves paying the ultimate price if required....24/7 with no overtime....duties...PT and the whole ball game, frequent deployment and extended periods away from family, annual fitness tests etc ad naseum. I'm sure you see the difference now between civilian employees of the DND and their roles/responsibilities and contracts with their employer.

All I can tell you is that I've been in for 21 years, and it's only recent news to me that I'm not an employee of DND.  I agree that there's a great distinction between the entities, but that doesn't mean that there's a lateral division between them.  I always envisioned the organization (DND) as having overall management of defence issues, while there is a smaller subcomponent of DND called the CF at the pointy end wearing the uniform.  Being in the subcomponent doesn't make one any less a member of the parent organization.

A quick search through my income tax records reveals T4 slips from 1999 to 2002 that indicate "DND/MDN" as my employer - so obviously at one point even DND believed we were employed by DND.

 

[284_226]

Actually, I think you are wrong and that you will find that there are Serving Military secunded to/employed many of these organizations, as well as Civil Servants.  Unless the person is a short-term contractor, they would be a Civil Servant paying into one of the several Unions they have.  Just as all civilian workers in Base CE, Base Transport, Base Supply, etc. fall under one of the Public Civil Service Unions.  It appears that you need to now figure out who is and who is not a Civil Servant, as you don't seem to have a grasp on that yet.

I have a pretty good grasp on it, actually.  There is no such thing as a "civil servant" under any law in Canada.

I'm not going to go reading the entire PSEA to find the reference, but this will suffice - http://www.jobs-emplois.gc.ca/jobs/halifax_e.htm#nonpsea.  It's a list of the organizations that aren't subject to the PSEA, therefore members of those organizations are not members of the "Public Service" or appointed by the "Public Service Commission". 

 

[armyvern]

All I can tell you is that I've been in for 21 years, and it's only recent news to me that I'm not an employee of DND.  I agree that there's a great distinction between the entities, but that doesn't mean that there's a lateral division between them.  I always envisioned the organization (DND) as having overall management of defence issues, while there is a smaller subcomponent of DND called the CF at the pointy end wearing the uniform.  Being in the subcomponent doesn't make one any less a member of the parent organization.

My contract is with the CF not DND....although my boss and thus myself fall under the MND who oversees the entire defense portfolio which includes the DND, the CF, DRDC, JAG, CSE etc etc. WE ARE ALL SEPERATE entities who ALL work for the government and fall under the Defense Portfolio thus the T4 slips.

Your arguement is such that you are equating the fact that ultimatly the boss' of all these seperate entities report to the Minister of National Defense and thus we are all the same. Not true. Refer to earlier baseball team reference. The Minister of National Defense (MND) oversees all of the Departments which fall under his defense portfolio. Department of National Defense, the CF, the JAG etc.

Being a part of one of these seperate heirarchies does not default you to them all....or else I'll just start reporting for work tomorrow at the  National Search and Rescue Secretariat (who also fall under the Defense porflio)....then who can call me AWOL? Legally you are trying to argue that I'd still then be at my workplace and under the authority of my boss while there. I've only got 18 years in so I may be wrong here, but I don't want to try to test your theory....how about you do it and let me know how you make out.

 

[wotan]

Dear Soldiers, Veterans, and all interested Canadians,

I am currently advocating for and assisting a Veteran in a Human Rights Commission case. The veteran (a soldier released after 17 years of exemplary service following a knee injury) is asking the Department of National Defence (DND) to step up and offer him job security.

The arguments for the case:
1) That DND must employ CF soldiers that can no longer meet the physical standards required in the CF. 
2) That DND must step up to guarantee job security and employment opportunities for injured CF soldiers for at least the duration of the employment contract that the soldier signed with that organization.

Utter bollocks.  The DVA will compensate the soldier (perhaps inadequately) for any injury suffered during his svc with the CF, if his injury is attributable to svc in the CF.  The CF is not a welfare agency.  We have some 12,000 people "ensconced" in NDHQ out of a Total Force of some 100,000.  Where would you like us to employ these wounded soldiers?  And who, exactly will fulfill the field duties that these soldiers can no longer fulfill?  Perhaps even more field/deployment time for those already over-tasked?  I have served and so does my wife, and we are both tired of carrying those that can't deploy or go to the field.  Thanks anyway.  Stuff your idea.

 

[armyvern]

I have a pretty good grasp on it, actually.  There is no such thing as a "civil servant" under any law in Canada.

I'm not going to go reading the entire PSEA to find the reference, but this will suffice - http://www.jobs-emplois.gc.ca/jobs/halifax_e.htm#nonpsea.  It's a list of the organizations that aren't subject to the PSEA, therefore members of those organizations are not members of the "Public Service" or appointed by the "Public Service Commission". 

No but they are (the google search response for a "CSE" search):

CSE is a federal government agency tasked with gathering communications intelligence and protecting Canadian government communications and information ...

who fall under the defense portfolio and report to the Minister of National Defense....
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/portfolio/index_e.asp

 

[George Wallace]

I'm not going to go reading the entire PSEA to find the reference, but this will suffice - http://www.jobs-emplois.gc.ca/jobs/halifax_e.htm#nonpsea.  It's a list of the organizations that aren't subject to the PSEA, therefore members of those organizations are not members of the "Public Service" or appointed by the "Public Service Commission". 

Well, now you are contradicting your own argument.  Canada Revenue Agency, for example, falls under Treasury Board.  Now the Minister overseeing Treasury Board and all its various branches, and the Minister overseeing National Defence and all its various branches, should make some more sense.

 

[284_226]

Utter bollocks.  The DVA will compensate the soldier (perhaps inadequately) for any injury suffered during his svc with the CF, if his injury is attributable to svc in the CF.  The CF is not a welfare agency.

So, by extension, anyone who is injured or disabled in any job in Canada does not have a right to be accommodated by their employer.  The Canadian Human Rights Commission disagrees with you.

We have some 12,000 people "ensconced" in NDHQ out of a Total Force of some 100,000.  Where would you like us to employ these wounded soldiers?  And who, exactly will fulfill the field duties that these soldiers can no longer fulfill?

I think you missed something along the discussion.  The whole argument revolves around the premise that nobody is asking the CF to overturn its Universality of Service Principle - they're asking to be accommodated within the DND organization, not within the CF.  Accommodated just like any other Canadian citizen has the right to be accommodated, within the bounds of extraordinary expense or safety concerns IAW CHRC policy.

Perhaps even more field/deployment time for those already over-tasked?  I have served and so does my wife, and we are both tired of carrying those that can't deploy or go to the field.  Thanks anyway.  Stuff your idea.

Thanks for the vote of support, considering you completely misinterpreted the entire premise of the challenge.

 

[284_226]

Well, now you are contradicting your own argument.  Canada Revenue Agency, for example, falls under Treasury Board.  Now the Minister overseeing Treasury Board and all its various branches, and the Minister overseeing National Defence and all its various branches, should make some more sense.

Huh?

Organizationally speaking, CRA has absolutely nothing to do with Treasury Board.  CRA has its own minister, which is the Minister of National Revenue.  Treasury Board is made up of a bunch of ministers, of which the Minister of National Revenue is only a member.

Before you make any more statements about organizational issues, please consult http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/index.html and read up on the legislation that creates each department, and which department reports to which minister.

 

[wotan]

So, by extension, anyone who is injured or disabled in any job in Canada does not have a right to be accommodated by their employer.  The Canadian Human Rights Commission disagrees with you.

I think you missed something along the discussion.  The whole argument revolves around the premise that nobody is asking the CF to overturn its Universality of Service Principle - they're asking to be accommodated within the DND organization, not within the CF.  Accommodated just like any other Canadian citizen has the right to be accommodated, within the bounds of extraordinary expense or safety concerns IAW CHRC policy.

Thanks for the vote of support, considering you completely misinterpreted the entire premise of the challenge.

Still bollocks.  The PS has a priority listing system, which now includes former CF members transitioning from CF service to DND service for a variety of reasons including medical causes.  But, the availability of positions is dependant upon the need of the PS, not upon the fact that pers are former soldiers.  And no, CF soldiers do not have a right to be "accommodated" by their employer, in fact the CDS recently issued a message indicating that the term "accommodation" was no longer to be used.  And no, I did not misinterpret the premise of the challenge, albeit you may have mis-stated it, but I am not sure of that.  I am not only a vet (in receipt of a disability pension) but am the President of a Legion Branch.  So, first, inform yourself before getting catty with those in the know.  I may not agree with some policies, even those endorsed by our Dominion President, but I most defintiely am aware of them.  I know what is available to our wounded soldiers and lost comrades.  When you are in the know, get back to me.  And as for support, I do not owe my support to you or anyone else.  And if you don't like that, you may still go get stuffed.

 

[George Wallace]

Huh?

Organizationally speaking, CRA has absolutely nothing to do with Treasury Board.  CRA has its own minister, which is the Minister of National Revenue.  Treasury Board is made up of a bunch of ministers, of which the Minister of National Revenue is only a member.

Isn't that what I just said; CRA falls under Treasury Board.   CF falls under DND.

Before you make any more statements about organizational issues, please consult http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/index.html and read up on the legislation that creates each department, and which department reports to which minister.

Seriously, all the Legalese that you seem to be pulling out of your hat, makes me believe you are here under false pretences, and are indeed a person who has a very close and personal interest in this matter.  Most of what you seem to be posting is muddying the waters, in the hope of getting a favourable point.  The more you go on, the further you seem to be getting from your goal.  

As for consulting your website to find out about organizational issues, why then after 21 years of Service you haven't figured out the DND and CF organizations?

 

[284_226]

My contract is with the CF not DND....

Then why, if there is distinct separation between the departments (DND, CF, JAG, CSE), is there a "National Defence" logo at the top of the last re-engagement offer you signed?  Civilian employees with DND or CSE don't get "re-engaged".  Why is there a National Defence logo at the top of all your CF100 leave forms that you've ever filled out, when civilian employees with DND or CSE don't have ranks, Service Numbers, or "leave", for that matter?  Why do my T4 slips from 1999-2002 say my employer is "DND/MDN"?

Being a part of one of these seperate heirarchies does not default you to them all....or else I'll just start reporting for work tomorrow at the  National Search and Rescue Secretariat (who also fall under the Defense porflio)....then who can call me AWOL? Legally you are trying to argue that I'd still then be at my workplace and under the authority of my boss while there. I've only got 18 years in so I may be wrong here, but I don't want to try to test your theory....how about you do it and let me know how you make out.

Now that's nonsense, and you know it.

 

[George Wallace]

One sure way.....wait until Strike Time and see what Unions they all belong to.

 

[Cloud Cover]

 And no, CF soldiers do not have a right to be "accommodated" by their employer, in fact the CDS recently issued a message indicating that the term "accommodation" was no longer to be used.  

Funny, I distinctly remember the CHRC ordering the Canadian Forces to accomodate women on submarines.

Anyway, this is getting out of hand. It is an interesting issue, and in the remote event it is succesful it still does nothing to the harm the requirements of the CF to maintain nothing but able bodied members while also ensuring that the government has an active duty to provide something more than a legion endorsed pension or other payment to an injured member. There is a certain dignity found in remaining in productive, gainful employment even if not with the CF, and a certain indignity in losing 17 years of seniority and starting all over again - with a disability in the distressingly less than accessible or accomodating social structure that goes with "working for the man."

And BTW, when I was acting for DND in civil and commercial matters, my employer was the DOJ and never DND. DND was always the "client." No idea how things are arranged now, but we do get a lot of resumes from that way flowing through our OD department.            

 

[armyvern]

So, by extension, anyone who is injured or disabled in any job in Canada does not have a right to be accommodated by their employer.  The Canadian Human Rights Commission disagrees with you.

You are very good at putting words in people's mouths. No where in his post was this inferred. The CF IS a seperate entity due to it's unique requirements for serviceable, deployable individuals. The CHRC has already ruled previously that the CF and it's human rights are in fact unique to any other employer, federal or civilian.

I think you missed something along the discussion.  The whole argument revolves around the premise that nobody is asking the CF to overturn its Universality of Service Principle - they're asking to be accommodated within the DND organization, not within the CF.  Accommodated just like any other Canadian citizen has the right to be accommodated, within the bounds of extraordinary expense or safety concerns IAW CHRC policy.

I think you've missed something. The term accomodation within the CF is gone....surely you've been reading your CANFORGENs? They ARE being hired on a priority basis in the Federal Public Service...why do you keep using the term DND? Nothing says they have to be (I'll use your term 'accomodated') 'accomodated' within DND. They are in fact, ALREADY eligable as priority hires in ANY federal department  (VAC, Revenue Canada etc) or federal organization outside of the CF.

So I'm failing to grasp what you are fighting for as injured members released on medical grounds already are priority hires for 'accomodation' within these other federal entities. It's already done. Perhaps because you think it has no teeth, that makes it moot, but the fact is it's already enacted ...so your arguement falls flat and I'm betting the CHRC will rule as such as well.

 

[284_226]

Still bollocks.  The PS has a priority listing system, which now includes former CF members transitioning from CF service to DND service for a variety of reasons including medical causes.  But, the availability of positions is dependant upon the need of the PS, not upon the fact that pers are former soldiers.  And no, CF soldiers do not have a right to be "accommodated" by their employer, in fact the CDS recently issued a message indicating that the term "accommodation" was no longer to be used.

The CDS can jump up and down all he likes ordering that the term "accommodation" was no longer to be used, but he has no power whatsoever outside of the CF.  The issue of accommodation in the Charter challenge has to do with accommodation in DND, which the CDS most certainly does not command.  And outside the realm of the CF, accommodation is a right.

And no, I did not misinterpret the premise of the challenge, albeit you may have mis-stated it, but I am not sure of that.  I am not only a vet (in receipt of a disability pension) but am the President of a Legion Branch.  So, first, inform yourself before getting catty with those in the know. 

I regret to inform you that your status as President of a Legion Branch does not immediately confer knowledge upon you by virtue of the position.

I may not agree with some policies, even those endorsed by our Dominion President, but I most defintiely am aware of them.  I know what is available to our wounded soldiers and lost comrades.  When you are in the know, get back to me.

I've met Legion Service Officers that didn't know how to get a copy of a VAC Disability Pension Application, so don't use your position as a claim to some wealth of knowledge exclusive only to your organization.[/quote]

And as for support, I do not owe my support to you or anyone else.  And if you don't like that, you may still go get stuffed.

I did not claim that you owed to support to anyone.  I merely asked you to read the information, and contribute ideas to Brenda if you were moved to do so.  If your attitude is indicative of the Legion leadership as a whole, it's no wonder the disabled members of the CF are getting screwed without so much as a kiss first.  Good night.