Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[FJAG]

I am pretty sure that Pierre Poilievre's Conservatives have received the same message as have Trudeau's Liberals: defence doesn't matter.

Interesting point.

While the CPC's Policy Declaration states that:

171. ... A Conservative Government will work towards spending at least the NATO recommended two (2) percent of 67 our GDP on National Defence

It also lists 23 policy categories of which "National Defence and Security" is number 22. That basically tells me how far down the line and out of sight and out of mind Defence is even for the CPC.

If that isn't bad enough, there are only eight policy statements under that topic. There were seven before the last National Convention when this one was added:

172. National Standard of Training for PTSD Service Dog Trainers The Conservative Party will create a National Standard of Training for PTSD Service Dog Trainers for Veterans. This standard must be developed to include a standard for PTSD Service Dogs and a standard for training the recipient veteran.

I don't want to be overly critical because there are some good, and long standing policy statements in there, but the point is that there hasn't been much recent debate or promulgation of any serious defence or security issues or initiatives. Just the occasional regurgitation of the usual motherhood things which didn't get fixed under Harper either.

 

[Good2Golf]

I think you are missing the effects on the RCN and RCAF.
SOF doesn’t have those issues as at user end the postings aren’t occurring. Staff rotates but the deployable forces are fairly isolated.

Having seen many years worth of trying to align some RCAF elements (predominately Tac Avn) to the Army’s MRS, only to have such plans dashed by the Army’s own inability to steward itself to the schedule of the MRS, it’s not just some in the Army that get frustrated with how it attempts to manage its rotation of readiness/deployable forces.

 

[dapaterson]

The Army is surprised every year by annual events.

 

[YZT580]

Correct. If the CPC wins next election, DND will not get a windfall of money because frankly, nobody cares.

maybe true but after 8 years of lies anything would be an improvement

 

[dimsum]

In non-military terms you give people a shot at small scale projects and see how they handle them with coaching. If they are good, or even just show promise, you give them another one. Some of them you turn into full time project managers. Some get further promotion. Others get relegated to Special Projects For Life.

That works in principle, but seconding Capt Bloggins from 4XX Sqn to ADM Mat or PMO for 3-6 months when 4XX Sqn is hurting for pilots and Capt Bloggins needs to fly at least once every 30 days to stay current is not really going to work out long term.

Also, that's where I said "small scale staff work at the tactical level" doesn't translate to being a part of project staff. Having done both, you can get a small inkling of whether Capt Bloggins would be good at verbal/written communication, but I maintain that it's hard to gauge whether they would be a good staff officer without having an extended time in a project staff.

Then, there's the chance that people will want to "game" the system. It'd probably happen anyway, but folks who do show promise but don't want to leave the operational world would just tank the small project. I suppose there could be financial/career incentives (like promotion) to entice them to staff jobs, but then those folks need to be senior enough to be promotable, or somehow get the funding piece. And, the twist with being promotable is if there is a great staff officer but only a so-so [insert trade] officer, then they're theoretically not going to get promoted...

maybe true but after 8 years of lies anything would be an improvement

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Furniture]

Then, there's the chance that people will want to "game" the system. It'd probably happen anyway, but folks who do show promise but don't want to leave the operational world would just tank the small project. I suppose there could be financial/career incentives (like promotion) to entice them to staff jobs, but then those folks need to be senior enough to be promotable, or somehow get the funding piece. And, the twist with being promotable is if there is a great staff officer but only a so-so [insert trade] officer, then they're theoretically not going to get promoted...

You highlight one of the CAF's retention issues in this paragraph.

If someone would rather stay operational, why would you force them to do something they don't want to do? Seems like a perfect way to encourage people to look elsewhere for employment.

It doesn't matter how much potential someone has, if they don't want to do the work they are not going to bring their best to the job.

 

[Good2Golf]

You highlight one of the CAF's retention issues in this paragraph.

If someone would rather stay operational, why would you force them to do something they don't want to do? Seems like a perfect way to encourage people to look elsewhere for employment.

It doesn't matter how much potential someone has, if they don't want to do the work they are not going to bring their best to the job.

And a failure to develop and maintain streams that allow suitably motivated members to advance along alternate career streams that in part, support procurement-related activities that fall far from the minds of many at the line units, but that is just as much an important function for the CAF as pure operations.

 

[dimsum]

And a failure to develop and maintain streams that allow suitably motivated members to advance along alternate career streams that in part, support procurement-related activities that fall far from the minds of many at the line units, but that is just as much an important function for the CAF as pure operations.

I’m one of those “alternate career streams” folks.

I know I asked for it, but my promotion prospects were definitely not helped because my career was (and continues to be) not the normal progression.

 

[Weinie]

You highlight one of the CAF's retention issues in this paragraph.

If someone would rather stay operational, why would you force them to do something they don't want to do? Seems like a perfect way to encourage people to look elsewhere for employment.

It doesn't matter how much potential someone has, if they don't want to do the work they are not going to bring their best to the job.

How many real purely operational positions does the CAF have, full time? CANSOFCOM has some, SAR has some, I am sure I have missed some others. But mostly, it is hurry up and wait. Recruiting was not a problem during the Afghanistan era. Thereafter, people voted with their feet.

 

[Kirkhill]

That works in principle, but seconding Capt Bloggins from 4XX Sqn to ADM Mat or PMO for 3-6 months when 4XX Sqn is hurting for pilots and Capt Bloggins needs to fly at least once every 30 days to stay current is not really going to work out long term.

Somewhere along the line Capt Bloggins is going to have to commit. Although I understand that a lot of pilots have commitment issues.

Also, that's where I said "small scale staff work at the tactical level" doesn't translate to being a part of project staff. Having done both, you can get a small inkling of whether Capt Bloggins would be good at verbal/written communication, but I maintain that it's hard to gauge whether they would be a good staff officer without having an extended time in a project staff.

Verbal/Written communication doesn't really start to define the problem. Generating consensus in a team is a lot different than having that team click their heels and say Yes Ma'am! to die Fuehrerin. That ability to interact with others may show up in different fashions - like how does a lieutenant take advice from NCOs, can they sustain friendly relations with the junior ranks, does he or she take on board what they are being told, do they give credit where it is due -

And how is that culture seen in the command and control culture of an operational unit?

Then, there's the chance that people will want to "game" the system. It'd probably happen anyway, but folks who do show promise but don't want to leave the operational world would just tank the small project. I suppose there could be financial/career incentives (like promotion) to entice them to staff jobs, but then those folks need to be senior enough to be promotable, or somehow get the funding piece. And, the twist with being promotable is if there is a great staff officer but only a so-so [insert trade] officer, then they're theoretically not going to get promoted...

I saw that and had to read that two or three times. My immediate reaction was WOW!!!

I'm glad that @Furniture and @Good2Golf articulated the responses they did.

 

[Weinie]

Somewhere along the line Capt Bloggins is going to have to commit. Although I understand that a lot of pilots have commitment issues.



Verbal/Written communication doesn't really start to define the problem. Generating consensus in a team is a lot different than having that team click their heels and say Yes Ma'am! to die Fuehrerin. That ability to interact with others may show up in different fashions - like how does a lieutenant take advice from NCOs, can they sustain friendly relations with the junior ranks, does he or she take on board what they are being told, do they give credit where it is due -

And how is that culture seen in the command and control culture of an operational unit?



I saw that and had to read that two or three times. My immediate reaction was WOW!!!

I'm glad that @Furniture and @Good2Golf articulated the responses they did.

I met a Cpl (played hockey and ball with in PLAP in the 80's) that turned down five promotions, because it would take him away from the thing he wanted to do, which was fix planes. I worked with a LCol, in Ottawa, who turned down a promotion to Col three times because it would have meant a job where he would have to be an asshole.

 

[Good2Golf]

I’m one of those “alternate career streams” folks.

I know I asked for it, but my promotion prospects were definitely not helped because my career was (and continues to be) not the normal progression.

I hear you. Hopefully the CAF/RCAF isn’t stupid enough not to capitalize on its investment, which also means keeping you engaged and productive and acknowledged within the organization. Your departure/transfer/etc. would be a loss. That being said, I’ve seen it and lived it similarly, and while I was able to walk both lines of line ops and tech, it did have a de facto cap (not being one of the Cool NORAD kids) that was a catalyst for moving on to something more rewarding and fulfilling. Good luck with your path, @dimsum!

 

[Furniture]

How many real purely operational positions does the CAF have, full time? CANSOFCOM has some, SAR has some, I am sure I have missed some others. But mostly, it is hurry up and wait. Recruiting was not a problem during the Afghanistan era. Thereafter, people voted with their feet.

I was referring more to units which can be operational, vs. static HQ/staff jobs.

Eg. People wanting to sail, rather than be posted to NDHQ.

Both jobs are necessary for the CAF, but not everybody wants to do both, and not everybody will do well at both. The current "system" forces people to do both though, regardless of their wishes or suitability.

 

[Kirkhill]

I met a Cpl (played hockey and ball with in PLAP in the 80's) that turned down five promotions, because it would take him away from the thing he wanted to do, which was fix planes.

The $100,000 Mechanic - because that's the kind of money that a top of the line tradesman can command outside the service.

On the other hand a 5B PI 4 at 84,000, a secure job with benefits and a full pension after 20 years isn't too shabby either. Especially when, after retirement, you can add a civvy mechanic's income on top.

Corporal

Pay level	Trade group	Basic pay	PI 1	PI 2	PI 3	PI 4
5A	Standard	5320	5398	5478	5554	5626
5A	Specialist 1	5959	6063	6166	6267	6376
5A	Specialist 2	6311	6436	6562	6688	6811
5B	Standard	5542	5621	5692	5773	5853
5B	Specialist 1	6185	6294	6398	6501	6608
5B	Specialist 2	6539	6670	6790	6920	7052

 

[Halifax Tar]

I was referring more to units which can be operational, vs. static HQ/staff jobs.

Eg. People wanting to sail, rather than be posted to NDHQ.

Both jobs are necessary for the CAF, but not everybody wants to do both, and not everybody will do well at both. The current "system" forces people to do both though, regardless of their wishes or suitability.

Part of the reason for the variation of postings is to provide a well rounded understanding of the CAF and its operations.

If someone just wants to sail, they can do that right now at least in my trade. Simply opt out of PERs at the S1 level.

 

[Furniture]

Part of the reason for the variation of postings is to provide a well rounded understanding of the CAF and its operations.

If someone just wants to sail, they can do that right now at least in my trade. Simply opt out of PERs at the S1 level.

Thats not really a solution though, you could still easily be posted as a S1 to Gagetown or Cold Lake.

How well rounded is someone who has done two years or less at each job? They have breadth of experience, but no depth.

There isn't an easy solution to make everyone happy, but the current "system" (which in my occupation is whatever the Occ Advisors at the time think is best) isn't working.

 

[Furniture]

The $100,000 Mechanic - because that's the kind of money that a top of the line tradesman can command outside the service.

On the other hand a 5B PI 4 at 84,000, a secure job with benefits and a full pension after 20 years isn't too shabby either. Especially when, after retirement, you can add a civvy mechanic's income on top.

Corporal

Pay level	Trade group	Basic pay	PI 1	PI 2	PI 3	PI 4
5A	Standard	5320	5398	5478	5554	5626
5A	Specialist 1	5959	6063	6166	6267	6376
5A	Specialist 2	6311	6436	6562	6688	6811
5B	Standard	5542	5621	5692	5773	5853
5B	Specialist 1	6185	6294	6398	6501	6608
5B	Specialist 2	6539	6670	6790	6920	7052

5B is a MCpl, and spec 2 is not what most spec trades make.

A Spec 1 5A Cpl makes $76.5K, still good money, but nowhere near $100K.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Thats not really a solution though, you could still easily be posted as a S1 to Gagetown or Cold Lake.

How well rounded is someone who has done two years or less at each job? They have breadth of experience, but no depth.

There isn't an easy solution to make everyone happy, but the current "system" (which in my occupation is whatever the Occ Advisors at the time think is best) isn't working.

I can only speak from what I have observed in my trade. But if you want to sail, stay an S1. We almost always only geo post for promotion.

We should hault the stupid tri-service requirements for CSS folks. That would alleviate a lot of this garbage.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

You highlight one of the CAF's retention issues in this paragraph.

If someone would rather stay operational, why would you force them to do something they don't want to do? Seems like a perfect way to encourage people to look elsewhere for employment.

It doesn't matter how much potential someone has, if they don't want to do the work they are not going to bring their best to the job.

Who would want to go work in CAF projects when history has shown 90% of them end up getting canned or used as toilet paper in NDHQ?

In another life, I was asked if I was interested in going Tech Staff. The answer was a big fat NO. I ultimately OT'ed to squeeze a little more juice out of the operational World.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Like I said earlier, "Breadth of experience" is of no use when the person with said experience is disgruntled and takes it elsewhere.