- Reaction score
- 7,217
- Points
- 1,360
And although I try not to paint with broad brushes, it only takes one idiot to ruin it for everyone else trying to be civil and do the right thing
Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???
- Thread starter Altair
- Start date
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 41,952
- Points
- 1,160
That's alot of orange juice...
She seems to agree; an explanation was offered. Given the dates - last two weeks of March, at end FY - it’s certainly plausible for mandatory payout of untaken accrued leave. If her account doesn’t add up I’m sure there will be several knowledgeable people who will waste no time saying so.
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,604
- Points
- 1,160
Mike Duffy was tried in court for expensing - and the PMO repaying - less than that.
- Reaction score
- 36,857
- Points
- 1,210
That drives questions about who was running the show before her and not ensuring people were using all their leave (up to the limits for cash out).
- Reaction score
- 7,007
- Points
- 1,190
So a very reasonable explanation for $58K of the $174K. Is she writing the 2nd letter or hoping we can't do math?
- Reaction score
- 36,857
- Points
- 1,210
She is saying that payroll for the period she was in was $58K, and leave cashout was $116K. In other words, on average, people cashed out four weeks of leave (or, potentially, cashed out overtime that wasn't taken as time in lieu).
Imagine if, as a military leader, you took on a new platoon in mid-March and, on April first, got in shit from your boss because your platoon had too much unused leave from the prior year. That's what happened here.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 7,007
- Points
- 1,190
Should read things twice, missed the nuance. I'd be curious if other offices had similar payouts or if it was poor leadership from the previous one she got saddled with.
Not that weird for some departments/organizations/units to run at a frantic enough clip that not all vacation gets used in the time allotted. If the senior management of a given organization is fine writing a check at end fiscal for a payout of vacation, some people just end up doing that. The level of management that can make that decision may be different from and lower than the level of management needed to push the necessary growth in FTEs to avoid having to do it.
Altair
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,177
- Points
- 1,140
The sad part here is the allegation will linger and most won't take the time to read the explanation.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 10,688
- Points
- 1,040
Gee, it sucks when people misunderstand early reports or the reports are full of implausible bullshit or mistaken "facts" which people choose to believe anyways, and sucks more when people don't follow later information or refuse to believe it. Will anyone learn from this episode, I wonder.
- Reaction score
- 21,670
- Points
- 1,010
Only if it suits their agenda, generally.
- Reaction score
- 2,013
- Points
- 1,260
Not that weird for some for some departments, even those that do not run at a frantic clip, where the employee elects to postpone the whole or part of annual vacation to the following calendar year. AKA "Vacation Carry-over".
I know I elected to carry over occasionally, and some did so routinely. No problem.
- Reaction score
- 5,972
- Points
- 1,260
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 10,688
- Points
- 1,040
Sure, I have a hard time getting to the truth and fuller context of things.
HavokFour
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,827
- Points
- 1,040
Carney and Kinew released a joint statement yesterday regarding the Port of Churchill Plus. They will be reviewing the viability of deploying icebreakers to keep the port open year round.
www.pm.gc.ca
Joint statement by Prime Minister Mark Carney and Premier Wab Kinew on federal-provincial collaboration regarding Port of Churchill Plus
This strong collaboration highlights the Port of Churchill Plus as a priority and will ensure it moves from consideration to implementation. Significant progress has been made to date and this will only continue to pick up speed.
IKnowNothing
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,026
- Points
- 990
I gave it a chance.
The discourse on a capital classification vs not was... a disappointing reminder in why I don't waste my time with amateurs slinging for profit rage bait.
Here is the pertinent excerpt from the PBO report:
"By including corporate income tax expenditures, investment tax credits and operating(production) subsidies, the framework blends policy measures with capital formation. While such measures may influence corporate investment decisions to some extent, our assessment is that federal spending on these measures would not be considered capital formation within the SNA or U.K. frameworks. ....
To ensure greater consistency with the SNA framework, we constructed capital vestments (from Table A2.2 in Budget 2025) to include only capital transfers, capital amortization, and selected measures targeting the housing stock. "
This (the actual disagreement between Jacques and the government) is a highly technical bun fight between accountants that boils down to a "de facto" vice "de jure" being blown up to ignite the ignorant.
Last edited:
