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

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

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,104
Points
1,060
[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

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
327
Points
1,130
CountDC said:
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

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
3,413
Points
1,060
Jarnhamar said:
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

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,810
Points
890
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

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,418
Points
1,040
dapaterson said:
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)

:pop:
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
3,413
Points
1,060
FJAG said:
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)

:pop:

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

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,810
Points
890
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

Army.ca Veteran
Staff member
Directing Staff
Reaction score
7
Points
530
daftandbarmy said:
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

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
13
Points
480
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

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
1,497
Points
910
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

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
873
Points
860
SeaKingTacco said:
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

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
1,497
Points
910
Remius said:
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

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,810
Points
890
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

 
Top