Liberals Want Injured to Keep Getting Danger Pay Back in Canada
- Thread starter The Bread Guy
- Start date
Blackadder1916
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 2,674
- Points
- 1,160
This Liberal MP (and 99% of all other MPs regardless of party affiliation) would probably not have known or cared about stopping allowances once an injured member has left the theatre if a relative had not been wounded. But if the government was to continue the allowances until the scheduled tour end date, how do they determine eligibility? Should it only be continued for those who are medically repatted for injuries due to military service?
Granted I have no experience with the mission in Afghanistan, but if I remember correctly one of the principles of service in a "special duty area" was that any injury, illness or death that occurred was to be judged attributable to military service. However, back then, DNBI was the major cause of casualties. To add some perspective, some examples of this that I have seen over the years are:
a. Myocardial infraction (heart attack) while in Cyprus. He applied for pension while still serving and he got it (and several years worth of back pension) shortly after returning from additional tours in Yugo.
b. Heart attack in Egypt.
c. Brain tumour that was discovered in Cyprus. Member died.
d. Hearing loss and balance problems due to insect that entered via ear canal while in Sharm el Sheik (popular resort for scuba and snorkeling) during tour in Egypt.
e. Complications following appendectomy in Egypt.
f. Tripped coming out of shower trailer and severe fracture of radius and ulna (lower arm). Some nerve damage as well.
g. Loss of left ring finger due to traumatic amputation. It was snagged and pulled off when he jumped down from the roof rack of a DND owned minibus.
These few examples, that I have personal knowledge, all left before the end of their tours for medical reasons. There are many others, of which I am aware, who also repatted early due to medical reasons, but I have no specific knowledge if they suffered permanent disability and were eligible for pension. Just because an injury is not sustained due to enemy action does not mean that it is the fault of the casualty.
Granted I have no experience with the mission in Afghanistan, but if I remember correctly one of the principles of service in a "special duty area" was that any injury, illness or death that occurred was to be judged attributable to military service. However, back then, DNBI was the major cause of casualties. To add some perspective, some examples of this that I have seen over the years are:
a. Myocardial infraction (heart attack) while in Cyprus. He applied for pension while still serving and he got it (and several years worth of back pension) shortly after returning from additional tours in Yugo.
b. Heart attack in Egypt.
c. Brain tumour that was discovered in Cyprus. Member died.
d. Hearing loss and balance problems due to insect that entered via ear canal while in Sharm el Sheik (popular resort for scuba and snorkeling) during tour in Egypt.
e. Complications following appendectomy in Egypt.
f. Tripped coming out of shower trailer and severe fracture of radius and ulna (lower arm). Some nerve damage as well.
g. Loss of left ring finger due to traumatic amputation. It was snagged and pulled off when he jumped down from the roof rack of a DND owned minibus.
These few examples, that I have personal knowledge, all left before the end of their tours for medical reasons. There are many others, of which I am aware, who also repatted early due to medical reasons, but I have no specific knowledge if they suffered permanent disability and were eligible for pension. Just because an injury is not sustained due to enemy action does not mean that it is the fault of the casualty.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
http://www.theglobeandmail.com//servlet/story/RTGAM.20061005.wxdanger05/BNStory/National/home
Adding insult to injury? Wounded soldiers have pay cut
GLORIA GALLOWAY
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
OTTAWA — The government must stop docking danger pay from soldiers who are injured while fighting for Canada in places like Afghanistan, a Liberal MP said yesterday.
Wounded members of the Canadian Forces "are no longer given the benefit of the danger pay nor the tax-exempt status, which I think is extraordinarily harsh and shows a broken faith with our troops," said Dan McTeague, an MP from Scarborough.
"I think every Canadian who finds out . . . that our wounded soldiers are being cut off, are being docked that kind of pay, will be outraged."
Canadian Forces personnel serving overseas are given extra pay, on top of their normal salaries, to account for the hardship and risk. Those who are currently serving their second tour of duty in Kandahar, for instance, receive $2,111 a month, tax-free, above their regular pay. In addition, those on high-risk missions are given an income-tax exemption of up to $6,647 a month.
That ends if a soldier's wounds are so severe that he or she must be removed from the theatre of war.
Mr. McTeague found out about the policy when his cousin's 20-year-old son was seriously injured last month in a suicide bombing in Kandahar.
"I don't think it speaks well to morale that a wounded soldier is told that, once they leave the operation, once they leave their battalion, once they leave Afghanistan, that they are effectively cut off," he told reporters yesterday.
"They have been signed up for the six-month period. We should honour that contract and we should retroactively pay all of those wounded soldiers who find themselves in this situation."
But the Conservative government does not seem prepared to act on Mr. McTeague's concern, and pointed out that the practice of stopping danger pay for the injured troops began when the Liberals were in power.
"Canada's new government fully supports our brave men and women in uniform. Our troops receive extra pay for the risks and hardships they face while deployed overseas," said Etienne Allard, a spokesman for Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor.
"When our soldiers return to Canada, they are no longer eligible for this type of operational allowance. We don't have any plans to change the current policy which has been in place since 1995." -- Gloria Galloway
Adding insult to injury? Wounded soldiers have pay cut
GLORIA GALLOWAY
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
OTTAWA — The government must stop docking danger pay from soldiers who are injured while fighting for Canada in places like Afghanistan, a Liberal MP said yesterday.
Wounded members of the Canadian Forces "are no longer given the benefit of the danger pay nor the tax-exempt status, which I think is extraordinarily harsh and shows a broken faith with our troops," said Dan McTeague, an MP from Scarborough.
"I think every Canadian who finds out . . . that our wounded soldiers are being cut off, are being docked that kind of pay, will be outraged."
Canadian Forces personnel serving overseas are given extra pay, on top of their normal salaries, to account for the hardship and risk. Those who are currently serving their second tour of duty in Kandahar, for instance, receive $2,111 a month, tax-free, above their regular pay. In addition, those on high-risk missions are given an income-tax exemption of up to $6,647 a month.
That ends if a soldier's wounds are so severe that he or she must be removed from the theatre of war.
Mr. McTeague found out about the policy when his cousin's 20-year-old son was seriously injured last month in a suicide bombing in Kandahar.
"I don't think it speaks well to morale that a wounded soldier is told that, once they leave the operation, once they leave their battalion, once they leave Afghanistan, that they are effectively cut off," he told reporters yesterday.
"They have been signed up for the six-month period. We should honour that contract and we should retroactively pay all of those wounded soldiers who find themselves in this situation."
But the Conservative government does not seem prepared to act on Mr. McTeague's concern, and pointed out that the practice of stopping danger pay for the injured troops began when the Liberals were in power.
"Canada's new government fully supports our brave men and women in uniform. Our troops receive extra pay for the risks and hardships they face while deployed overseas," said Etienne Allard, a spokesman for Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor.
"When our soldiers return to Canada, they are no longer eligible for this type of operational allowance. We don't have any plans to change the current policy which has been in place since 1995." -- Gloria Galloway
the 48th regulator
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
"I find it deplorable," said Liberal MP Dan McTeague (Pickering-Scarborough East). "If they're wounded, there's no way under the sun they should find themselves cut off. It looks like we're cheap or we don't care.
"If we've got $13 billion (surplus) bucks to put down towards our debt, surely we have enough money to restore the funding to our wounded soldiers who've taken a bullet for their country."
The moment Canada's injured are sent to Germany or to Canada for medical treatment they are no longer entitled to "operational allowance" that adds $2,111 to monthly pay.
That allowance, the same regardless of rank, compensates soldiers for being away from home and for mission hardships and risks, defence spokesperson John Knoll said. Allowance is paid for "being in that place and under those conditions."
The military can continue the allowance for up to 25 days after a soldier leaves Afghanistan and usually does. After that, it ends.
Injured soldiers also lose tax-free status. In Afghanistan, soldiers do not pay income tax on earnings up to $6,647 a month. That perk disappears if they are hurt and returned home.
Defence officials do note that, unlike many in civilian jobs, injured soldiers still collect their base salary and retain benefits while recovering.
McTeague argues the injured should be compensated for the time they were to be in Afghanistan, usually "a six-month commitment. We should retroactively pay all those wounded soldiers.
"The country owes it to them (and) ... the Prime Minister has an opportunity to do that."
A cousin of McTeague's was severely wounded in an Afghan suicide bombing last month. He's recovering at Toronto's Sunnybrook Hospital.
Interesting points Mister McTeague.
I appreciate your care of us wounded soldiers. I have respect that you have had a family member involved. But I have a wee bit of a problem with your agenda. Is it for the troops, or for yourself.....
After winning the Liberal nomination for the federal riding of Ontario, which was comprised of the towns of Ajax, Pickering and Whitby east of Toronto, Dan was elected as the Member of Parliament for Ontario Riding in the October 25, 1993 general election. In 1997, Mr. Acreage was re-elected in the newly redistributed riding of Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge a riding he won again on the November, 2000 General Election with an increased majority. In 2004 Mr. McTeague was re-elected to the new riding of Pickering Scarborough East.
On New Year's Eve 1994, Privates Philip Badanai (Royal Canadian Regiment) and John Tescione (48th Highlanders) were returning from an escort mission through a small village in Croatia, when 25 Serb soldiers suddenly ambushed them. The Serbs riddled the jeep with small arms fire with over 100 hits. Badanai although hit 3 times, twice in his back, was able to drive the vehicle to the main camp saving the life of Tescione who was hit 7 times, with 4 rounds to his head.
Interesting, as I stated before, my pay was stripped even before I landed on my own terra firma, however, as a Peacekeeper under the liberal Government, I was not allowed my "Danger Pay". However, you demand that from the current government.
Please amuse me, and answer my question, Mr McTeague. Would you request a retroactive payment to the Blue hatted mannequins, that we were, the same pay? I await an answer, and payment of the ducats stripped from me that you are championing for...
dileas
tess
"If we've got $13 billion (surplus) bucks to put down towards our debt, surely we have enough money to restore the funding to our wounded soldiers who've taken a bullet for their country."
The moment Canada's injured are sent to Germany or to Canada for medical treatment they are no longer entitled to "operational allowance" that adds $2,111 to monthly pay.
That allowance, the same regardless of rank, compensates soldiers for being away from home and for mission hardships and risks, defence spokesperson John Knoll said. Allowance is paid for "being in that place and under those conditions."
The military can continue the allowance for up to 25 days after a soldier leaves Afghanistan and usually does. After that, it ends.
Injured soldiers also lose tax-free status. In Afghanistan, soldiers do not pay income tax on earnings up to $6,647 a month. That perk disappears if they are hurt and returned home.
Defence officials do note that, unlike many in civilian jobs, injured soldiers still collect their base salary and retain benefits while recovering.
McTeague argues the injured should be compensated for the time they were to be in Afghanistan, usually "a six-month commitment. We should retroactively pay all those wounded soldiers.
"The country owes it to them (and) ... the Prime Minister has an opportunity to do that."
A cousin of McTeague's was severely wounded in an Afghan suicide bombing last month. He's recovering at Toronto's Sunnybrook Hospital.
Interesting points Mister McTeague.
I appreciate your care of us wounded soldiers. I have respect that you have had a family member involved. But I have a wee bit of a problem with your agenda. Is it for the troops, or for yourself.....
After winning the Liberal nomination for the federal riding of Ontario, which was comprised of the towns of Ajax, Pickering and Whitby east of Toronto, Dan was elected as the Member of Parliament for Ontario Riding in the October 25, 1993 general election. In 1997, Mr. Acreage was re-elected in the newly redistributed riding of Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge a riding he won again on the November, 2000 General Election with an increased majority. In 2004 Mr. McTeague was re-elected to the new riding of Pickering Scarborough East.
On New Year's Eve 1994, Privates Philip Badanai (Royal Canadian Regiment) and John Tescione (48th Highlanders) were returning from an escort mission through a small village in Croatia, when 25 Serb soldiers suddenly ambushed them. The Serbs riddled the jeep with small arms fire with over 100 hits. Badanai although hit 3 times, twice in his back, was able to drive the vehicle to the main camp saving the life of Tescione who was hit 7 times, with 4 rounds to his head.
Interesting, as I stated before, my pay was stripped even before I landed on my own terra firma, however, as a Peacekeeper under the liberal Government, I was not allowed my "Danger Pay". However, you demand that from the current government.
Please amuse me, and answer my question, Mr McTeague. Would you request a retroactive payment to the Blue hatted mannequins, that we were, the same pay? I await an answer, and payment of the ducats stripped from me that you are championing for...
dileas
tess
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Danger pay is just that...Danger pay. It should end on departure from the danger. That does not mean I dont think some form of recover or pain and suffering payment should not be applicable to the wounded recovering at home. Now if the system worked the way it should the DVA system would activivate within 30 days of arrival if not sooner and DVA expidited system would have DVA pension kick in within 30 days. That would I suppose be the answer. It is a whole new kettle of fish we are talking about it has never been done in the past I dont see a reason to change. That IMHO as a soldier who was wounded.
the 48th regulator
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
The pay has been budgeted to the Military, the regiment, what happens to the few coins collected when one is wounded?
Now HOM has explained, he willnot get a VAC Payment, should he be punished for being injured and losing that "danger" pay? He left because of the dang danger....he is owed it until the end of contract.
I say bloody yes!
dileas
tess
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
48th I hear ya,
I cant figure out why the argument exists that VAC wont be their? If VAC did its job as directed it would be at the hospital bed within days of the soldiers arrival back in Canada. The appropriate paper would be filed and an expedited VAC decision would be sought and a payment would occur as fast as 30 to 45 days. Would that not work if what I have detailed was the way VAC operated?
I cant figure out why the argument exists that VAC wont be their? If VAC did its job as directed it would be at the hospital bed within days of the soldiers arrival back in Canada. The appropriate paper would be filed and an expedited VAC decision would be sought and a payment would occur as fast as 30 to 45 days. Would that not work if what I have detailed was the way VAC operated?
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
I completely agree that there should be a retroactive pay to those wounded in contact all the way back to the 50's.
And I agree this is a crappy way to bring up the issue, an opposing party using it for public gain and mud smearing But I do think it is an important issue and one that although might not deserve to be in the for front of the public eye I o believe it should be in the forefront of issue in NDHQ and in our politicians minds.
And I agree this is a crappy way to bring up the issue, an opposing party using it for public gain and mud smearing But I do think it is an important issue and one that although might not deserve to be in the for front of the public eye I o believe it should be in the forefront of issue in NDHQ and in our politicians minds.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
3rd Horsemen you didn't read my initial post did you, If the wound will not cause permanent disability you do not get anything. If you need to get your wounds pack for 3 months but those wounds are essentially cosmetic you will get evaced but guess what, you don't get a VAC pension in fact you get squat. See where the argument lies, many wounded are removed from theater because their wounds require more care then the Role 3 can provide but they do not incur long term disability to the soldier so essential as was pointed out they are cut off.
Gunner
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 11
- Points
- 430
Gents,
I think you are confusing alot of different issues here and lumping it all together as if it were one and the same:
a. Should soldiers wounded due to enemy action continue to receive Hardship, Risk and Foreign Service Premium? No, of course not, they are no longer serving in the theatre of operations and there is no entitlement. This is not additional pay, these benefits are to compensate you for the hardship of living in an operational theatre, the increased risk associated with the deployment and the generic FSP that all government employees receive. Its purpose is not to compensate for physical or mental suffering from a wound.
b. Should a soldier receive financial compensation for being wounded in action? I was originally against this but I am now sitting on the fence. Someone mentioned that if a soldier is injured on the first day in theatre, they should receive the full 6 months of benefits (above) but if they are wounded on their last day in theatre, they only get an additional day. This doesn't make sense at all. You either get a lump sum for being wounded or you don't. No middle ground that would provide for a graduated scale of financial compensation (you either get it or you don't). The graduated scales are the purview of SISIP and VAC (loss of limbs provide x dollars, etc). Hence, if anything is given, it must be a lump sum. 1K, 5K or 10K, it doesn't matter to me as the amount is minor in the grand scheme.
c. SISIP Benefits. If you lose parts of your body or your life, your NOK receive their money very quickly. No issues with SISIP.
d. VAC benefits. There is absolutely no requirement for VAC to be waiting for a wounded soldier to get off the plane. I've been involved on the periphery for wounded soldiers and there has been relatively few instances of VAC not going above and beyond what is required of them. As HOM stated, if you fully recover from your wounds, you probably won't receive anything from VAC. Why would you? If you develop problems later in life (eg arthritis), they will be there to help you at that time. I do not doubt one second the horror stories of dealing with VAC (listen to Bruce Henwood for the reality of the 90s) but I will stress once again, in my opinion, VAC has been very helpful in the support to soldiers over the last 10 months. If you are wounded, and do not believe you are being properly supported, talk with your assisting officer right away. If he can't help you, complain to the first general officer who comes through your door.
Edited to clear up some very bad grammar.
I think you are confusing alot of different issues here and lumping it all together as if it were one and the same:
a. Should soldiers wounded due to enemy action continue to receive Hardship, Risk and Foreign Service Premium? No, of course not, they are no longer serving in the theatre of operations and there is no entitlement. This is not additional pay, these benefits are to compensate you for the hardship of living in an operational theatre, the increased risk associated with the deployment and the generic FSP that all government employees receive. Its purpose is not to compensate for physical or mental suffering from a wound.
b. Should a soldier receive financial compensation for being wounded in action? I was originally against this but I am now sitting on the fence. Someone mentioned that if a soldier is injured on the first day in theatre, they should receive the full 6 months of benefits (above) but if they are wounded on their last day in theatre, they only get an additional day. This doesn't make sense at all. You either get a lump sum for being wounded or you don't. No middle ground that would provide for a graduated scale of financial compensation (you either get it or you don't). The graduated scales are the purview of SISIP and VAC (loss of limbs provide x dollars, etc). Hence, if anything is given, it must be a lump sum. 1K, 5K or 10K, it doesn't matter to me as the amount is minor in the grand scheme.
c. SISIP Benefits. If you lose parts of your body or your life, your NOK receive their money very quickly. No issues with SISIP.
d. VAC benefits. There is absolutely no requirement for VAC to be waiting for a wounded soldier to get off the plane. I've been involved on the periphery for wounded soldiers and there has been relatively few instances of VAC not going above and beyond what is required of them. As HOM stated, if you fully recover from your wounds, you probably won't receive anything from VAC. Why would you? If you develop problems later in life (eg arthritis), they will be there to help you at that time. I do not doubt one second the horror stories of dealing with VAC (listen to Bruce Henwood for the reality of the 90s) but I will stress once again, in my opinion, VAC has been very helpful in the support to soldiers over the last 10 months. If you are wounded, and do not believe you are being properly supported, talk with your assisting officer right away. If he can't help you, complain to the first general officer who comes through your door.
Edited to clear up some very bad grammar.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
I thought that you might be interested in this release from the MOD today. Particularly the extension of pay Allowances compared to Canada's for wounded Troops. Note that this is only in effect while in hospital.
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/DefencePolicyAndBusiness/NewWelfarePackageForServiceHospitalInpatients.htm
New welfare package for service hospital in-patients
5 Oct 06
The Under-Secretary of State for Defence, Derek Twigg, today (5 October 2006) announced the implementation of a welfare package for service hospital in-patients.
The new package focuses on operational casualties at the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine and the Defence Medical Services Rehabilitation Centre Headley Court.
The package includes a range of measures that will replicate the 'Operational Welfare Package' for those in hospital and will improve financial assistance to the families of those injured.
Mr Twigg said:
"The healthcare our Service personnel get is exemplary. We are always looking at ways to improve the support we provide to our people and I am pleased that this work, which has been ongoing since August, has now come to fruition.
"As a result we are able to extend the welfare package to ensure that their stay in hospital is more comfortable and that we provide further support to the families. However we are not complacent and we are constantly enhancing the entire welfare package on offer."
The measures include:
A daily financial allowance for all in-patients of £5 per day for UK patients and £10 per day for those overseas.
An improvement to already extant funded travel support provided to the families of those hospitalised.
Free delivery of postal packets over the Christmas period in line with the arrangements extant in operational theatres.
The extension of Longer Service Separation Allowance (LSSA), Longer Service at Sea Bonus (LSSB) and Longer Separation Allowance (LSA) to include all those treated as in-patients.
Improvements to access to television, Army Library Service facilities and broadband internet connections.
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/DefencePolicyAndBusiness/NewWelfarePackageForServiceHospitalInpatients.htm
New welfare package for service hospital in-patients
5 Oct 06
The Under-Secretary of State for Defence, Derek Twigg, today (5 October 2006) announced the implementation of a welfare package for service hospital in-patients.
The new package focuses on operational casualties at the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine and the Defence Medical Services Rehabilitation Centre Headley Court.
The package includes a range of measures that will replicate the 'Operational Welfare Package' for those in hospital and will improve financial assistance to the families of those injured.
Mr Twigg said:
"The healthcare our Service personnel get is exemplary. We are always looking at ways to improve the support we provide to our people and I am pleased that this work, which has been ongoing since August, has now come to fruition.
"As a result we are able to extend the welfare package to ensure that their stay in hospital is more comfortable and that we provide further support to the families. However we are not complacent and we are constantly enhancing the entire welfare package on offer."
The measures include:
A daily financial allowance for all in-patients of £5 per day for UK patients and £10 per day for those overseas.
An improvement to already extant funded travel support provided to the families of those hospitalised.
Free delivery of postal packets over the Christmas period in line with the arrangements extant in operational theatres.
The extension of Longer Service Separation Allowance (LSSA), Longer Service at Sea Bonus (LSSB) and Longer Separation Allowance (LSA) to include all those treated as in-patients.
Improvements to access to television, Army Library Service facilities and broadband internet connections.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,476
- Points
- 1,040
>Brad I apologise I did a knee jerk reply and I didn't read what you were saying in the light you meant it in.
No apology is necessary. I have not and likely will never have to face the stress of bombs and bullets. The worst threat I face is the traffic on the Port Mann Bridge. However, thank you for coming back with that.
No apology is necessary. I have not and likely will never have to face the stress of bombs and bullets. The worst threat I face is the traffic on the Port Mann Bridge. However, thank you for coming back with that.
Gunner
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 11
- Points
- 430
big bad john said:
BBJ,
Trying to compare compensation and benefits between Canada, the UK and the US is like comparing apples, oranges and bananas. It is a falacious argument even to enter it into the discussion.
I will stand behind what Canada does for its killed and wounded soldiers and most other western countries. We have nothing to be ashamed of and this whole discussion centres around political opportunism.
Cheers,
Gunner
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 11
- Points
- 430
http://www.forces.gc.ca/hr/centre/pdf/ddbenefits_e.pdf
The link will provide you with an overview of the Death and Disability Programs and Services that you and your family are/may be entitled to should you be killed, wounded or injured in service of our country. The programs and services are constantly changing so don't be afraid to ask your assisting officer, your commanding officer, etc about a benefit or situation you face.
Just one last point on this subject. Make sure you have your affairs in order before going overseas:
- make sure you NOK Notification form is up to date. Make sure your NOK is someone responsible and not the whiskey dolly you picked up at the bar one week prior to deployment because they promised to "love you long time". If you are young, make it your mother/father, not someone young and irresponsible.
- don't confuse your designated NOK notification with the beneficiaries of your SISIP, SDB, etc, etc. They are not one and the same.
- make sure your CF will is up to date (if you are doing anything other than leaving everything to your NOK, get a proper will drawn up by a lawyer).
- if you don't want to be a vegetable for the rest of your life, make sure you protect yourself with a living will (see point on wills).
- make sure your SISIP life insurance is maximized for at least the duration of your deployment. It's not about you, its about the future of your family.
- if you are ever in doubt about your beneficiaries or your NOK at any time during your deployment period, make sure you immediately change or address the issue. You never know when you will run out of time.
The legacy that you leave is a personal responsibility, not the CF's. Therefore, make sure you adequately address it before it is too late - you owe it to your family.
The link will provide you with an overview of the Death and Disability Programs and Services that you and your family are/may be entitled to should you be killed, wounded or injured in service of our country. The programs and services are constantly changing so don't be afraid to ask your assisting officer, your commanding officer, etc about a benefit or situation you face.
Just one last point on this subject. Make sure you have your affairs in order before going overseas:
- make sure you NOK Notification form is up to date. Make sure your NOK is someone responsible and not the whiskey dolly you picked up at the bar one week prior to deployment because they promised to "love you long time". If you are young, make it your mother/father, not someone young and irresponsible.
- don't confuse your designated NOK notification with the beneficiaries of your SISIP, SDB, etc, etc. They are not one and the same.
- make sure your CF will is up to date (if you are doing anything other than leaving everything to your NOK, get a proper will drawn up by a lawyer).
- if you don't want to be a vegetable for the rest of your life, make sure you protect yourself with a living will (see point on wills).
- make sure your SISIP life insurance is maximized for at least the duration of your deployment. It's not about you, its about the future of your family.
- if you are ever in doubt about your beneficiaries or your NOK at any time during your deployment period, make sure you immediately change or address the issue. You never know when you will run out of time.
The legacy that you leave is a personal responsibility, not the CF's. Therefore, make sure you adequately address it before it is too late - you owe it to your family.
RHFC_piper
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
Well... I've been reading through all these well put arguments and points and have found too many good points to quote in one post... so here's just my two cents.
I was wounded less then a kilometer from the enemy, at 5 am, just after eating breakfast, just after waking up, by shrapnel from a 30mm round fired from a chain gun suspended beneath an allied forces ground support aircraft (AKA, the A-10). This situation is commonly known as "Friendly Fire"... Don't let the name fool you, there was nothing friendly about it.
As a result of the High Explosive Incendiary rounds landing 5 feet behind me, I have several shrapnel wounds on my legs, back and right arm... 6 on these wounds are still being packed. 2 of them still contain metal… and 2 are within .5 cm from my kidneys… those are also the ones with the metal.
So, we've established that my wounds were not from combat, but I was in a combat zone and I wasn't doing anything heroic during or immediately before the incident, nor was I doing anything that could be considered "risking my tour" (at least not anymore than the other 30+ people who were wounded at the same time)
So I figure I was prematurely removed from my tour by forces beyond my control, as were a few others who were with me.
Does that entitle me to the remainder of my overseas pay? Perhaps not... ‘Cause I could recover and return before the end of my contract as a reserve augmentee... or not.
I have yet to deal with SISIP and DVA regarding my wounds and how they will be assessed, but I am confident it will be fair. So I’m not too concerned.
As for the loss of 5 months of overseas pay:
As I’ve read in other quotes; soldiers shouldn’t rely on the overseas bonuses as they are “bonuses”… But you must realize, to a reservist, this is an incentive. For some of us it a way to bolster our regular (military) pay so that it matches (or at least comes close to) the money we could have potentially made in our civilian professions; which, I might add, we can’t return to if sent home injured and on sick leave, until our contract ends. (yet more loss of income… which, incidentally, isn’t covered by DVA or SISIP)
Am I saying I’m financially suffering now because of the lack of extra income? No, not really. It’s only $10,000 less I can put away for a house and a wedding… but that’s a personal issue. I am still well within my means.
But the point I’m trying to make is, while it’s just a bonus to some regular force members who have a regular income and are paying into a pension, for reservists, who aren’t paying into pensions and who’s possible civi pensions don’t cover ‘act of war’, the bonus is something we rely on to recoup lost income for leaving civilian employment for the opportunity to server our country overseas and employ the skills we practice (on a part time basis).
Don’t take this as me being disenchanted or even ungrateful for still being alive. And lord knows I’d trade every cent of my bonus and even my regular pay for the lives of those who were lost that day and the day before.
And I don’t mean to say that reservists deserve it more than regular force, its just perspective. There may be regular force members for whom this tour represented tuition money, or house money or debt reconciliation. My point is that it shouldn’t be trivialized; it is still a loss of expected income.
To sum up; As a wounded soldier who has lost 5/6th of his tour I can’t say I disagree with this idea and I don’t think you’d hear a lot of arguments from anyone who has had their tour cut short.
</semi-pointless rant>
P.S. Sorry about the novel.
I was wounded less then a kilometer from the enemy, at 5 am, just after eating breakfast, just after waking up, by shrapnel from a 30mm round fired from a chain gun suspended beneath an allied forces ground support aircraft (AKA, the A-10). This situation is commonly known as "Friendly Fire"... Don't let the name fool you, there was nothing friendly about it.
As a result of the High Explosive Incendiary rounds landing 5 feet behind me, I have several shrapnel wounds on my legs, back and right arm... 6 on these wounds are still being packed. 2 of them still contain metal… and 2 are within .5 cm from my kidneys… those are also the ones with the metal.
So, we've established that my wounds were not from combat, but I was in a combat zone and I wasn't doing anything heroic during or immediately before the incident, nor was I doing anything that could be considered "risking my tour" (at least not anymore than the other 30+ people who were wounded at the same time)
So I figure I was prematurely removed from my tour by forces beyond my control, as were a few others who were with me.
Does that entitle me to the remainder of my overseas pay? Perhaps not... ‘Cause I could recover and return before the end of my contract as a reserve augmentee... or not.
I have yet to deal with SISIP and DVA regarding my wounds and how they will be assessed, but I am confident it will be fair. So I’m not too concerned.
As for the loss of 5 months of overseas pay:
As I’ve read in other quotes; soldiers shouldn’t rely on the overseas bonuses as they are “bonuses”… But you must realize, to a reservist, this is an incentive. For some of us it a way to bolster our regular (military) pay so that it matches (or at least comes close to) the money we could have potentially made in our civilian professions; which, I might add, we can’t return to if sent home injured and on sick leave, until our contract ends. (yet more loss of income… which, incidentally, isn’t covered by DVA or SISIP)
Am I saying I’m financially suffering now because of the lack of extra income? No, not really. It’s only $10,000 less I can put away for a house and a wedding… but that’s a personal issue. I am still well within my means.
But the point I’m trying to make is, while it’s just a bonus to some regular force members who have a regular income and are paying into a pension, for reservists, who aren’t paying into pensions and who’s possible civi pensions don’t cover ‘act of war’, the bonus is something we rely on to recoup lost income for leaving civilian employment for the opportunity to server our country overseas and employ the skills we practice (on a part time basis).
Don’t take this as me being disenchanted or even ungrateful for still being alive. And lord knows I’d trade every cent of my bonus and even my regular pay for the lives of those who were lost that day and the day before.
And I don’t mean to say that reservists deserve it more than regular force, its just perspective. There may be regular force members for whom this tour represented tuition money, or house money or debt reconciliation. My point is that it shouldn’t be trivialized; it is still a loss of expected income.
To sum up; As a wounded soldier who has lost 5/6th of his tour I can’t say I disagree with this idea and I don’t think you’d hear a lot of arguments from anyone who has had their tour cut short.
</semi-pointless rant>
P.S. Sorry about the novel.
Gunner
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 11
- Points
- 430
RHFC_piper,
The important aspect is the CF will cover you for the period you are recovering, recuperating, and rehabilating (see section 19 of the link). If you are fully recovered and want to return to work prior to the end date of your contract, the military will not keep you bound to the contract.
The important aspect is the CF will cover you for the period you are recovering, recuperating, and rehabilating (see section 19 of the link). If you are fully recovered and want to return to work prior to the end date of your contract, the military will not keep you bound to the contract.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
HitorMiss said:
+1
Similar threads
