Ottawa to pay nearly $1B to settle sexual misconduct lawsuits against CAF

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=CountDC]So why is this suit against the CAF and tax payers footing the bill? 
[/quote]
It's infuriating our taxers are being spent on this because of POS CAF members and their weak and cowardly chains of command.

I get the CAF is responsible as an employer. Lets have some of those lawyers making the millions go after guilty members.

 

[mariomike]

One person brought up an interesting point.  If they were working at Company X and a victim of sexual misconduct the charges and suit would be against the individual.  Mr/Ms Y would be paying.  So why is this suit against the CAF and tax payers footing the bill?

The employer pays,
https://army.ca/forums/threads/130702/post-1576399.html#new

 

[daftandbarmy]

It's infuriating our taxers are being spent on this because of POS CAF members and their weak and cowardly chains of command.

I get the CAF is responsible as an employer. Lets have some of those lawyers making the millions go after guilty members.

This is an election year and the Liberals are on the ropes. They just sprinkled half a B note over cranky BC. You can expect to see a lot more of this kind of largesse shoveled off the back of the truck this summer in the ‘War for the Headlines’.

 

[dapaterson]

This is not a recent thing; the lawsuit has been ongoing for a considerable length of time.  I don't think the timing is tied to the election cycle - in a majority government situation, you've got a 1 in 4 chance of something falling within the 12 months before an election.

 

[FJAG]

This is not a recent thing; the lawsuit has been ongoing for a considerable length of time.  I don't think the timing is tied to the election cycle - in a majority government situation, you've got a 1 in 4 chance of something falling within the 12 months before an election.

I'd really like to believe that but unfortunately I have way too many cynic bones in my body.

As an election issue though I think this cuts two ways; there's the liberals and socialists who see this as righting a major gender based wrong vs the conservative view of a massive government expenditure that is the result of government and civil servant (in this case military) misconduct that should never have happened in the first place. (Note in particular that DoJ was arguing against any liability on a perfectly valid legal principle until overruled by the government on the grounds of optics)

op:

 

[daftandbarmy]

I'd really like to believe that but unfortunately I have way too many cynic bones in my body.

As an election issue though I think this cuts two ways; there's the liberals and socialists who see this as righting a major gender based wrong vs the conservative view of a massive government expenditure that is the result of government and civil servant (in this case military) misconduct that should never have happened in the first place. (Note in particular that DoJ was arguing against any liability on a perfectly valid legal principle until overruled by the government on the grounds of optics)

op:

Yes!

And if they really wanted Justice with a capital 'J', they'd be pursuing these issues through the legal process and fixing the organization by - in some cases - punishing the guilty. However, that is messy and takes alot of time and thorough professional attention so it's easier to just pay people to 'go away and be happy', coincidentally, right before an election.  :

 

[dapaterson]

More information on the case in Lawyer's Daily.

https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/13901/proposed-class-action-settlement-on-sexual-misconduct-in-military-includes-structural-changes-says-co-lead-counsel

 

[garb811]

Yes!

And if they really wanted Justice with a capital 'J', they'd be pursuing these issues through the legal process and fixing the organization by - in some cases - punishing the guilty. However, that is messy and takes alot of time and thorough professional attention so it's easier to just pay people to 'go away and be happy', coincidentally, right before an election.  :

I'm confused. How have you seemingly missed the entire reason for Op HONOUR by this point?

Mission

    To eliminate harmful and inappropriate sexual behaviour within the CAF.

 

[CountDC]

found this to be interesting:

7.11 Eligibility Limited for Category A Payments
The Compensation Amount in respect of Category A is only payable to women, and to those who
identify as a LGBTQ2+ persons, in respect of incidents occurring after April 17, 1985, who
establish that they meet the criteria set out in Schedule “Q”. For greater clarity, the Parties do
not intend for persons who do not identify as LGBTQ2+ and who experienced Sexual Misconduct
on the basis only that they were perceived to be LGBTQ2+ to be eligible for compensation under
Category A.

So because my friend is gay and thus I was guilty by association and both discriminated and harassed he can claim but I can't.  In fact as I stayed in I went through more of it than he did as it followed me.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I happen to know of at least two cases where friends of mine who were straight males and were sexually assualted.

According to this, they won't be eligible for compensation.

Guess that is fair...

 

[Remius]

I happen to know of at least two cases where friends of mine who were straight males and were sexually assualted.

According to this, they won't be eligible for compensation.

Guess that is fair...

How do you read that exactly?  There are other categories that they would be eligible for.  If they were assaulted Cat A is not likely the right one for them to apply for.

B1 or B2 maybe.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

How do you read that exactly?  There are other categories that they would be eligible for.  If they were assaulted Cat A is not likely the right one for them to apply for.

B1 or B2 maybe.

Ah! Thanks! Did not realize there were categories to this thing.

 

[dapaterson]

And the province of British Columbia is now seeking standing in court.  Together with (at least) Ontario and Nova Scotia, they are seeking to recover health care costs related to the alleged misconduct of soldiers, sailors and aircrew.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/sexual-assault-canadian-forces-900-million-settlement-1.5291978

 

[grayzone]

Ottawa to pay nearly $1B to settle sexual misconduct lawsuits against Canadian Armed Forces

Have to admit reading comments on news pages can be interesting some times. One person brought up an interesting point. If they were working at Company X and a victim of sexual misconduct the charges and suit would be against the individual. Mr/Ms Y would be paying. So why is this suit against the CAF and tax payers footing the bill? Was the CAF supposed to provide something above and beyond Company X?

Had the displeasure at one point dealing with things in Ottawa and a lot times the problem with these cases were it was a he said/she said case when the MPs investigated with no evidence to support punishment.

I wonder how many males will be filing and what the reaction will be to it. Still amazed at how it is still assumed the victim is a female.

current estimates: over 40% of claims are from men

Over 40 per cent of military sexual misconduct class action claims are from men: Eyre - National | Globalnews.ca

Gen. Wayne Eyre said fixing the military's culture is vital because the world is "probably more dangerous now than it has been since the end of the Cold War."

globalnews.ca

 

[Brad Sallows]

People are usually at their most generous buying something for their own benefit, using someone else's money.

 

[Lumber]

I'm not going to say they're lying, because you know, we should believe them, but applications to the suit for compensation required no substantiation, and a few people I heard mention that they had applied definitely made it sound like they applied just t get "free money",

 

[dapaterson]

How would you have conducted substantiation? A steward claiming sexual assault by a MARS officer - ask the MARS O if he was a rapist, and, if he denied it, deny her compensation? A MARE claiming a MARS Capt(N) rubbed another MARS O's face in her breasts - if the then CAPT(N) denied it, you'd deny the MARE O compensation? (Yes, I know, ridiculous examples.)

What would the level of effort be to validate over 19,000 individual claims? To what standard? To what cost?

 

[Jarnhamar]

I'm not going to say they're lying

I'd wager some were. It looked even easier to submit a fraudulent claim than CERB appeared to be.

A nessary evil for actual victims to get some kind of compensation from an employer and system that utterly failed them.

 

[daftandbarmy]

People are usually at their most generous buying something for their own benefit, using someone else's money.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I'm not going to say they're lying, because you know, we should believe them, but applications to the suit for compensation required no substantiation, and a few people I heard mention that they had applied definitely made it sound like they applied just t get "free money",

I mean, if they weren't able to jump on the CERB/CEWS gravy train, I guess this is the next best thing