I am a CAF member & I want better pay and benefits (a merged thread)

[George Wallace]

I ran into this issue a few years ago when a crew member's aunt (who had raised her and was listed 1st on her NOK) had passed away.  When I contacted the Chief Clerk (reserve) about CTA options, I was told the member didn't qualify.  Her last sentence to me (not a word of a lie): "If we fly everyone home for funerals how would we afford pay raises." 

The answer to the RMS Clerk should have been:  "Easily covered by the termination of one RMS Clerk from the gene pool with extreme prejudice."

 

[Transporter]

This is the boilerplate response from DGMC:

and

Thanks for the info. So as not to hijack this thread yet again, I will leave the issue at that.

 

[c_canuk]

So the double dip thing is ok, as long as you don't join the same dept, under the idea that Civilian Employees are considered DND employees not CAF?

Functionally it's the same thing because the pension is paid regardless and the position is filled regardless. Eliminating Double Dipping doesn't save any money. Potentally it opens more positions to others though I suppose. Better for the Economy perhaps.

Can you do 25 in the CAF and 25 in DND and collect 2 pensions?

 

[Transporter]

Can you do 25 in the CAF and 25 in DND and collect 2 pensions?

To my knowledge, yes.

 

[dapaterson]

You can accumulate only 35 years total of pensionable service for the Federal government (excluding the part-time pension plan for the CAF).  So release with a 25 year CAF pension and you can then get a 10 year PS pension.

This gets wonky if you are in the full-time CAF plan, return to part-time service while still contributing, then join the public service plan.  So, if you join at 20, leave at 35 with 15 years in the CAF plan but continue as a part-time Reservist and join the public service plan you'll reach 35 years of pensionable service - 25 in the CAF and 10 in the public service - at age 45.

(EDIT: spelling)

 

[Crispy Bacon]

So the double dip thing is ok, as long as you don't join the same dept, under the idea that Civilian Employees are considered DND employees not CAF?

Functionally it's the same thing because the pension is paid regardless and the position is filled regardless. Eliminating Double Dipping doesn't save any money. Potentally it opens more positions to others though I suppose. Better for the Economy perhaps.

Here's my understanding of the policy:

The Reserves were hurting for experienced and knowledgable leaders (Sgts, WOs, Capts, Majs), and the Reg F was seeing a lot of leaders of those ranks releasing.  As an incentive to keep the corporate knowledge of those Reg F pers in the system, the incentive was that they would be allowed to "retire" from the Reg F, collect their Reg F pension, but still work as a Res F member.  The result was WOs and Majs taking their $60,000-90,000 salaries on top of their $30,000-50,000 pensions.  Is a WO's work worth $90,000?  A Maj's work worth $140,000?  At the time, when they allowed double dipping, apparently the cost-benefit was worth it.

That was then, this is now.  From the DGMC FAQ response above, it sounds like the Res F is no longer hurting for leadership (although the Army would disagree...) and the Reg F isn't seeing the attrition it once was, meaning the policy had to change.

There's also, ethically speaking, the issue of circumventing the spirit of the CFSA by allowing members to take 35 day "breaks" and only work 330 days so as to purposely not be re-enrolled in the pension plan after 365.  But that's another story...

 

[George Wallace]

Here's my understanding of the policy:

The Reserves were hurting for experienced and knowledgable leaders (Sgts, WOs, Capts, Majs), and the Reg F was seeing a lot of leaders of those ranks releasing.  As an incentive to keep the corporate knowledge of those Reg F pers in the system, the incentive was that they would be allowed to "retire" from the Reg F, collect their Reg F pension, but still work as a Res F member.  The result was WOs and Majs taking their $60,000-90,000 salaries on top of their $30,000-50,000 pensions.  Is a WO's work worth $90,000?  A Maj's work worth $140,000?  At the time, when they allowed double dipping, apparently the cost-benefit was worth it.

That was then, this is now.  From the DGMC FAQ response above, it sounds like the Res F is no longer hurting for leadership (although the Army would disagree...) and the Reg F isn't seeing the attrition it once was, meaning the policy had to change.

There's also, ethically speaking, the issue of circumventing the spirit of the CFSA by allowing members to take 35 day "breaks" and only work 330 days so as to purposely not be re-enrolled in the pension plan after 365.  But that's another story...

If only it was the Reserves benefiting from the retiring Regular Force members.  Unfortunately, many of those Double Dippers in Class B positions were Reservists backfilling Regular Force positions of pers deploying or on MATA/PATA Lve during the years of high intensity deployments.  Very few of those Class B positions were where you would ideally want them, in actual Reserve units where they would mentor the Reserves. 

I saw several positions in Standards and Training filled at the School by recently retired Reg Force members, who had no concept on what the Reserves actually were, and treated the Reserves just as they would Regular Force pers.  These people could not, and still can not, conceive the idea that you need to more than a few days to announce a Crse Start Date and course load Reservists.  I had Reservists who needed a minimum of six months to book Leave from their civilian jobs to attend courses. 

It is mostly those Double Dipping Class B Reservists who were back-filling Reg Force positions, that Gen Leslie came down on.......which also encompassed those Double Dippers who were in Reserve units.

 

[Brasidas]

The Reserves were hurting for experienced and knowledgable leaders (Sgts, WOs, Capts, Majs), and the Reg F was seeing a lot of leaders of those ranks releasing.  As an incentive to keep the corporate knowledge of those Reg F pers in the system, the incentive was that they would be allowed to "retire" from the Reg F, collect their Reg F pension, but still work as a Res F member.  The result was WOs and Majs taking their $60,000-90,000 salaries on top of their $30,000-50,000 pensions.  Is a WO's work worth $90,000?  A Maj's work worth $140,000?  At the time, when they allowed double dipping, apparently the cost-benefit was worth it.

There was no cost-benefit, and they were not being paid extra to "stay in the system". They could go elsewhere, collect a comparable salary (its not unreasonable to expect that they could find a job that paid at least 85% of their trade), and either have nothing to do with the CF or be a normal Class A reservist.

It was paying them the $60-90,000 salaries that were already being paid to fill cadre positions at reserve units (which would only be *not* paid if no one qualified applied for the job), along with their pensions.

Abuse occurred in putting so many class B's in places such as HQ's that had nothing to do with the reserve. The reserve does offer a safety valve of being able to backfill positions, but relying upon it in the long term is a problem. If turning off the safety valve is necessary to fix the problem, so be it.

I'm not arguing whether it was appropriate under CFSA or anything else, but cost has little to do with it.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

While I don't like to lose benefits or pay more for my pension than I did 5 years ago, the one policy change that has left that crappy taste in my mouth is the posted prohibited (if that is the right term) folks who are pre-OFP and in the training system having to pay for rations while on course.  The lowest paid folks, new to the CAF, away from their D HG & E and who have little choice but to "take the hit" or not join.  That has and never will sit right with me.

Personally, WRT pay/benefits/etc I think the 'worst is yet to come' if the next fed election sees JT and the gang at the helm.  I seem to recall pay raises multiple years in a row in the past 1/2 decade'ish.  Wonder how many of those we will see in years to come.

 

[noneck]

You can accumulate only 35 years total of pensionable service for the Federal government (excluding the part-time pension plan for the CAF).  So release with a 25 year CAF pension and you can then get a 10 year PS pension.

This gets wonky if you are in the full-time CAF plan, return to part-time service while still contributing, then join the public service plan.  So, if you join at 20, leave at 35 with 15 years in the CAF plan but continue as a part-time Reservist and join the public service plan you'll reach 35 years of pensionable service - 25 in the CAF and 10 in the public service - at age 45.

(EDIT: spelling)

Quick question for you DA, how does an RCMP pension fit into the mix? Can you do 25-35 with the RCMP, then get out and work a number of full time years Class B on top of (by that time almost 30 years) Class A? Just thinking about retirement job options post RCMP. Cheers Noneck

 

[dapaterson]

The max is 35 years under all federal plans (less the part-time Reserve plan).

So, in theory, I guess you could do 35 years RCMP, followed by Reserve service that never crosses the 55 out of 60 months threshold and thus never enter the Reg F (full-time) pension plan, and collect both the 35 year RCMP pension and the Reserve part-time pension once you want to put up your feet for good.

 

[CountDC]

As I do not have first hand knowledge I will put it out there up front.  What we have been told second hand from an employee  that was working here is that one of the pension gods advised her that the mbrs serving both RCMP and Reserve should be aware that the time is counting for both.  If our RCMP mbrs work with the reserves at the same time they would be at their 35 years threshold once both reach a total of 35 years ie 20 years RCMP and 15 years Reserve pension time.    No stipulation on Full time vice Part time.

 

[dapaterson]

As I do not have first hand knowledge I will put it out there up front.  What we have been told second hand from an employee  that was working here is that one of the pension gods advised her that the mbrs serving both RCMP and Reserve should be aware that the time is counting for both.  If our RCMP mbrs work with the reserves at the same time they would be at their 35 years threshold once both reach a total of 35 years ie 20 years RCMP and 15 years Reserve pension time.    No stipulation on Full time vice Part time.

Reserve time only counts against the 35 year limit when it is in Part I of the CFSA, not part I.1.  See CANFORGEN 180/09 para 4.

INFORMATION REGARDING THE CANADIAN FORCES MEMBERS AND THE PUBLIC SERVICE SUPERANNUATION ACT(PSSA)

4. IMPACT ON 35 YEAR PENSIONABLE SERVICE LIMIT: THE PSSA DOES NOT RECOGNIZE PENSIONABLE SERVICE ACCRUED UNDER PART I.1 OF THE CFSA, THEREFORE, IT DOES NOT COUNT FOR THE 35 YEAR PENSIONABLE LIMIT ALLOWABLE UNDER THE THREE FEDERAL PENSION PLANS (IMPOSED UNDER THE PSSA, CFSA AND THE ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE SUPERANNUATION ACT (RCMPSA)). HOWEVER, SERVICE ACCRUED UNDER PART I OF THE CFSA IS SUBJECT TO THE 35 YEAR LIMIT AND ANY SERVICE FROM PART I.1 OF THE CFSA THAT IS TRANSFERRED TO PART I OF THE CFSA WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE 35 YEAR LIMIT.

See also the PWGSC SAM Special Bulleting 2009-003 para 3.3.

 

[CountDC]

CBI 209.50 and 209.51 both still show members on Class B & C service who were relocated at crown expense as being eligible. 

Both read
There may be some argument over the phrase "for that Class B or C Reserve Service" in the case of an individual relocated for an earlier period of service; to my mind, however, if you were relocated and still have a relocation entitlement at the end of your period of service you should be covered.

You may want to chase down a senior clerk and get clarification on this.

We are still paying the mbrs all benefits if they were relocated and extended.  The only stipulation is that when the position is readvertised for competition it must be advertised nationally and indicate move will be considered. if we advertise it only locally then the mbr loses the benefits.  This does have the slight draw back for the mbr in that they may lose the competition and have to look for a new job.

 

[CountDC]

The answer to the RMS Clerk should have been:  "Easily covered by the termination of one RMS Clerk from the gene pool with extreme prejudice."

Agree

 

[CountDC]

Thanks DAP - good to have as we have several RCMP and Border mbrs with the unit.

 

[noneck]

DAP thanks for the clarification.

I have 15 years with the Force and over 27 in PRes service and I am already planning my exit at 24 and a day from the Force. I previously elected to buy back 5 years of Class B (a) and Class C service and will go at 24 and a day with 30 years of pensionable RCMP service. I am now trying to factor in the PRes pension plan to work out what exactly I can do with the PRes when I retire from the day job. Your information and insight helps greatly.

Cheers
Noneck

 

[stellarpanther]

And?

We are talking about people who chose to be in the military, not the RCMP.

Again, the taxpayers pay us well, and we need to get over ourselves.

I don't mean to just complain about this quote because there are others as well that are similar, but what is with this attitude "people choose to be in the military or nobody forced you to join or stay"?  Is there something wrong with wanting things to be better or doing what you can to fight for change?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Nothing at all..................................but if you have nothing but a bitch to add, then expected to be bitch-slapped.

 

[upandatom]

It depends on where you work. I have Ptes and Cpls as ACISS-IST doing the same job (and more if you include their radio, satellite and line tasks) as CS-01 and CS-02 personnel. A step 1 CS-01 gets paid $53k while a step 8 CS-02 gets paid $81k. Add on top of that, after hours upgrades and maintainance is overtime for the CS personnel but is free labor for the military. I have had these people working side by side doing weekend upgrades, one gets overtime the other doesn't.

The same goes for other specialities. Yes, admin and clerks are paid more than CR counterparts, but in the IT world, military are paid less for more work.

DONT forget to add in with the increase in pay, Many of them receive free training, that in the civilian sector, they would have to shell out a portion or full price for, and some of these courses are $2500 a week.

They also get a tonne of leave, annual vacation and sick, and they have easily the ability to carry it over year per year, they also have a "honeymoon" week, where at one time in their career they get a free paid extra week of vacation, and to add even more.

They can opt out to make 11 months pay spread out over the 12 month period for a year, in exchange for an extra 20 days leave.

Math time, thats 74k a year, for a possible 9.5 months work with leave included. Still more then I make, and they have more leave, and I was their supervisor.

They are also DAMN near impossible to fire, or get rid of.

Current unit I am at has many civilian employees, there is even one that said last september he was going to retire june, looking at the books he was physically at work 3 of those 8 months, the rest was on leave. But still paid.

So do not go crying "DND civilian employees arent paid enough" some of the quality of work I see, I'd rather pay a monkey $50k a year to fling shit around the office then have some of the system abusers I see. At least there is entertainment value in that. 

(Not saying all civie employees are this way, majority of the ones I have worked with are)