• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Liberals Want Injured to Keep Getting Danger Pay Back in Canada

Gunner said:
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 point is; the military is now my only coverage.  There aren't many employers in the civilian sector that would want to deal with a freshly wounded, PTSD ladened, potential health insurance leech... even though it sounds like discrimination, its hard to prove when they can easily say they hired someone more qualified. and no matter how qualified you think you are, there's always someone more so... damnit, I'm ranting again.

Anyway, although its true that I could potentially terminate my contract early and seek more gainful employment elsewhere, I wouldn't be fit enough to do this until about a month before my contract runs out anyway.  In the mean time, I'm still out at least $9000 in bonus-bling from not being in the sandbox.

But as I've said before; I am prepared for this. I just now have to re-budget and save up another year for the house I was going to buy in March of 07.  Again, I can still buy food, gas, clothes, etc... so its just another set back.

My point, reiterated, is that now, due to an incident beyond my control, not only will I have chronic problems, but my plans will be delayed for an indeterminent amount of time.  And, if someone were to say "Hey, you signed up for 12 months, six of which are in danger, and you got hit and sent home, so we will horour the rest of you contract. Enjoy."  I wouldn't be saying no.

But in the same respect; I am greatful that they aren't saying "Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya. see ya laters, toon."
I appreciate all the help and attention, and while I'm healing I hope to help others from the battlegroup as much as I can, I can just understand why people think this whole concept is acceptable. 

I can also see why people think this is unacceptable. As the old saying goes; "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
But thats for another rant.
 
Gunner,

You present very valid points.  Very nice options, via programs available, and the help one receives.

We preach about lessons learned from the troops.  That they should bring back their knowledge of the combat, and teach the troops of the future.

You are getting that right now.  Gunner I am a soldier wounded, in the '90s.  HOM and RHFC_piper are troops wounded in "the sandbox".

We are telling you, that regardless of the fact that all of these dandy programs are available, the immediate answer everyone gets is;  You are fine and entitled to nothing.

Your analogy;

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.

That's right, they do not need to be there, because if they are and you are entitled to benefits you would get them from the time you signed their papers.  Everyday lost by you, is a dollar saved by them.

If you develop problems later in life (eg arthritis), they will be there to help you at that time.

Really eh, well maybe someone should have advised them of this when I finally broke down, and had to seek help for PTSD 2 years ago.  I was put through hell.  I was told the likes of "you are a young whipper snapper, and not a priority for us right now".  This was 2004, not the '90s.

It angers me to no avail, when I hear the troops talking about what they have to go through, and then other stating that we must have done something wrong and the establishment is correct.  It all works well....really it does, and tess you were wounded way back when and things have changed.

Horse Pucky.

The idea is not about reaciving beer money from the VAC, it is to seek the qualified help of professionals; treatment.  If any of these troops develope any sort of reaction, since they were deemed "healed" they must line up with the rest of the MIR commandos, seeking help for blisters.  They are not rushed to the front of the line, they do not see any specialist for the particular wounds.  This is what we seek.  Not the extra pay, or the slap on the back from people.

And to lead us back onto the thread, to the MPs, Mr. McTeague and Mr. Stoffer, that are challenging the government regarding pay, what is it you are really seeking?

I welcome your response.


dileas

tess
 
Wounded ... and a pay cut

Toronto Star (full article)
Oct. 6, 2006. 05:24 AM
BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
OTTAWA BUREAU

OTTAWA—His body torn apart by shrapnel, on painkillers and facing months of rehabilitation, Trooper Jeffrey Hunter had been in a German hospital just hours when he was given the news — he was losing his danger pay.

"They just went in and told him he's not getting it because he's not in theatre anymore," said his father Bill Hunter, of Aurora.

"This is a kid that may not walk again, we don't know. He could wind up losing one of the legs from infection ... and they go in and tell him he's not going to get his danger pay.

"When does the danger end for him? I don't understand this," he said angrily.

His 23-year-old son, who arrived in Afghanistan in August, was left badly wounded in Tuesday's attack west of Kandahar that killed two of his fellow soldiers.

He was airlifted to Landstuhl, Germany, for advanced medical care. Yesterday, to add to his already long list of worries, military officials added another — they confirmed he was no longer entitled to his "operational allowances."

Those allowances — totalling $2,111 a month for soldiers serving in Afghanistan — are meant to compensate for the hardships and risks of the mission.

But under military rules, if a soldier is injured and removed from Afghanistan, that soldier will lose the right to collect these financial perks, which can boost monthly pay by more than 30 per cent.

As well, the salary soldiers earn in Afghanistan is tax-free and that perk disappears, too.

But the tough message delivered to the wounded soldier yesterday angered his father and left him questioning the military's support for its injured troops.

"He hadn't been there six hours," Hunter said yesterday.

"He's in a lot of pain and I've got someone from the military going in and telling him they're not going to give him his danger pay. ... This is not right.

"He's going to have a long-time therapy, a lot longer than the six months he was sent away for in Afghanistan," Hunter said. "Why aren't these kids getting danger pay?"

Military officials declined to comment on the specifics of Hunter's case. They noted that the defence department has the discretion to continue to pay the military allowance for an extra 25 days — and usually does — but there is no indication yet that Hunter will receive it.

Liberal MP Dan McTeague (Pickering-Scarborough East) has been leading the push to have the "insensitive" policy overturned, saying injured soldiers should continue to collect the financial incentives until their tour of duty was due to end.

Officials with Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor have so far dismissed calls to rethink the policy and accused opposition MPs of trying to "mislead" the public.

But Hunter's plight — a situation faced by dozens of other wounded soldiers — puts a human face on a policy that risks ensnaring the Conservatives in another public relations nightmare on the Afghanistan issue.

The family's concerns also offer a glimpse into a largely unseen side of Canada's war in Afghanistan — the trauma and turmoil of the wounded soldiers and their distraught families. So far, more than 150 Canadian soldiers have been injured in the conflict since 2001, compared with the 39 killed.

"I don't want to be a spokesperson but there are other families out there ... the government should be supporting us now in our time of need," said Hunter, a retired 31-year veteran of the Toronto police force.

But even this father of three admits he's been badly jarred by his family nightmare that started with a phone call from a military chaplain in Kandahar.

"The padre asks who you are. He said, `I have Jeffrey here and he wants to talk to you,' and they put him on the phone," Hunter recalled.

"Through his yelling and screaming, he told us he had been wounded and his legs were broken. Then they took the phone off and took him into surgery," he said.

His son, a member of the Royal Canadian Dragoons, was one of several soldiers providing security for road construction near Kandahar when insurgents attacked with mortars, rocket propelled grenades and small arms fire. Sgt. Craig Paul Gillam and Cpl. Robert Thomas James Mitchell were killed.

Hunter survived the attack but suffered a shattered leg and shrapnel wounds across his body, his father said.

The wounded soldier has since been able to call his family from his hospital bed in Germany.

"He said, `Dad, I'm not in good shape. When you see me, I don't look good,'" Hunter recalled.

He's expected to be flown to Ottawa Saturday and later transferred to Toronto's Sunnybrook for follow-up treatment.

But to add insult to injury, his parents were told yesterday that they would have to pay their own expenses to get to Ottawa to meet their son.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Wounded ... and a pay cut

Toronto Star (full article)
Oct. 6, 2006. 05:24 AM
BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
OTTAWA BUREAU




Sadly, that article does a lot of damage to the CF.  It is shoddy journalism and doesn't put the soldier, nor his family, in a good light.  It makes it look like our Troops are going over to Afghanistan with purely mercenary motives.  It makes no mention of any of the other benefits in place to assist our wounded.  No mention of SISIP, DVA benefits, Pensions that kick in immediately (after being approved and backdated), etc.  Preying on a families grief derails the truth.
 
George Wallace said:
Sadly, that article does a lot of damage to the CF.  It is shoddy journalism and doesn't put the soldier, nor his family, in a good light.  It makes it look like our Troops are going over to Afghanistan with purely mercenary motives.  It makes no mention of any of the other benefits in place to assist our wounded.  No mention of SISIP, DVA benefits, Pensions that kick in immediately (after being approved and backdated), etc.  Preying on a families grief derails the truth.

I agree completely.  When I explained the situation to my family, for the most part, they understood why I was no longer entitled to the "overseas" bonuses, as I was no longer overseas. 

I posted this article simply because it illustrate the frustration felt by all familys and friends of wounded soldiers.

Consider how your family would feel if you were in the place of a wounded soldier sent home.  (Not directed at you George, but to everyone)

This is just another perspective of this issue.
 
Why should there pay continue??? Hazard pay ends when you leave the SDA anyways. Just because someone is wounded doesn't mean it should continue!!!!!! What a crock, sadly, the civilians are uninformed. SISIP may not cover wages lost but DVA will compensate.
 
George Wallace said:
Wounded ... and a pay cut

Toronto Star (full article)
Oct. 6, 2006. 05:24 AM
BRUCE CAMPION-SMITH
OTTAWA BUREAU




Sadly, that article does a lot of damage to the CF.  It is shoddy journalism and doesn't put the soldier, nor his family, in a good light.  It makes it look like our Troops are going over to Afghanistan with purely mercenary motives.  It makes no mention of any of the other benefits in place to assist our wounded.  No mention of SISIP, DVA benefits, Pensions that kick in immediately (after being approved and backdated), etc.  Preying on a families grief derails the truth.

As opposed to the shoddy treatment that is dealt to some that are wounded?

No mention of SISIP, DVA benefits, Pensions that kick in immediately (after being approved and backdated), etc.  Preying on a families grief derails the truth.

Here,

I will scan and post some of the letters I received over the years from both groups that you mentioned, some as recent as a year ago, and we will see if it is shoddy journalism, or the treatment of the wounded by our Government.


2023 said:
Why should there pay continue??? Hazard pay ends when you leave the SDA anyways. Just because someone is wounded doesn't mean it should continue!!!!!! What a crock, sadly, the civilians are uninformed. SISIP may not cover wages lost but DVA will compensate.

Really, and you have proof of this first hand, correct?  I can tell you it is not always immediate from the DVA.  And I am not talking about compensation, but treatment as well.

dileas

tess
 
Tess

I didn't want to 'hijack' the topic from loss of 'Danger Pay' to the problems faced in 'fighting with DVA' to get benefits and pensions.  That is a whole topic in itself.  It is a serious concern that has to be addressed by the Government.  In talks with you, and others, it has become evident that DVA has serious bureaucratic problems in identifying who and who is not a Veteran and their perception that unless you are a WW I, WW II or Korea Veteran, you take the backseat or don't even deserve a seat at all......But that is for a whole different thread.
 
But to add insult to injury, his parents were told yesterday that they would have to pay their own expenses to get to Ottawa to meet their son.


This is what really upsets me the most!  
 
We are telling you, that regardless of the fact that all of these dandy programs are available, the immediate answer everyone gets is;  You are fine and entitled to nothing.

If you are wounded or injured in an operational theatre and are expected to make a full recovery, than you are correct and you not entitled to anything.  Why would you be?  As I stated above, I am not necessarily against a lump sum payment for someone wounded in theatre but paying out their benefits to the end of their tour is not the answer.

Really eh, well maybe someone should have advised them of this when I finally broke down, and had to seek help for PTSD 2 years ago.  I was put through hell.  I was told the likes of "you are a young whipper snapper, and not a priority for us right now".  This was 2004, not the '90s.

I told you before, I can't comment on your particular case because I don't have any of your details of who you saw, when and what responses you received.

Remaining comments severed.
 
I'm not opposed to hijacking the thread.  I think all publicity - even, maybe especially the bad stuff, can do naught but good if it helps to focus public attention on VAC's (to date) abysmal support for wounded vets.
 
fbr2o75 said:
But to add insult to injury, his parents were told yesterday that they would have to pay their own expenses to get to Ottawa to meet their son.


This is what really upsets me the most! 

Well... as horrible as it sounds, its wholey inaccurate.  My Parents, who travelled from Hanover to Sunny Brook Hospital, My Fiance, who came from Waterloo and even my sister who lives in Toronto, have been able to claim all their travel expences for when they came to visit me when I got home from Germany.

Granted, they did have to pay initially.
 
Thanks for the update that sounds more beleivable. In my civvie job it has happened where we have had a driver have an accident, heart attack etc, out of province and our first priority was o get the family there. While realising not everyone has the finanicial means to do so.
 
fbr2o75 said:
Thanks for the update that sounds more believable. In my civvies job it has happened where we have had a driver have an accident, heart attack etc, out of province and our first priority was o get the family there. While realising not everyone has the financial means to do so.

Yeah, what does happen in the case of the immediate relatives not having access to (sometimes large) funds to travel/hotel in the event someone is injured? Is there a contact group people can approach?

I ask this, because when I last came out of Viet Nam, it was on the basis of my father being in critical condition in the hospital and my mother had contacted the American Red Cross asking if they could get the information to me. They (Marines) flew a helicopter in, picked me up in the middle of a sweep/firefight, flew me to Okinawa, bumped an officer on the next flight to the US. They had me in Travis AFB less than 2 hours, the American Red Cross bought me a ticket to Minneapolis, and on to Winnipeg. It was for me to reimburse the American Red Cross for the flight on a voluntary basis. Quite impressive.
 
Opposition party politicking is a perogative of the opposition party and they are welcome to sound off on any subject they wish.  Always been and always will be.

There have been tons of grievances over the years from individuals who feel they are entitled to some form of allowance when the regulations say otherwise.... Always been and always will be.
 
Well the big guy agrees with the MP's,

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061006/danger_pay_061005/20061006?hub=TopStories

He made an announcement on Canada Am today, in that the military is looking into the removal of dangerpay.

dileas

tess
 
Really, and you have proof of this first hand, correct?  I can tell you it is not always immediate from the DVA.  And I am not talking about compensation, but treatment as well.

dileas

tess

[/quote]

First hand, nope, but my wife was injured in Kabul on RO and was repatted. SISIP wouldn't cover lost wages. DVA, it isn't immediate but it is there....and getting much much better than what it was say 10 yrs ago.
 
Ref 48th's post above..

Canada's military commander says the armed forces are working to ensure wounded Canadian soldiers continue to receive danger pay after they leave the theatre.

You know, it's not like I'm looking for any favours but, really, I vote for Rick Hillier as 'Boss of the Year'. Really, two... three days after the issue hits the street and the guy's already on it... fairly impressive.

I hope it works out, I hope the members in question get a fair deal...
 
Back
Top