Where's our back pay
- Thread starter Ammogod
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 260
here is what i got emailed a little while ago, it says pay will increase is delayed, though will still be retroactive to April 1 2004
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
Do we know what % yet? Or has that yet to be decided?
DME
DME
- Reaction score
- 8,519
- Points
- 1,160
Read the message.
3. NOTWITHSTANDING THE RECENT PROGRESS IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROCESS, SUFFICIENT INFO IS STILL NOT AVAILABLE
TO COMPUTE THE FY 04/05 PAY ADJUSTMENT.
I would guess "NO"
3. NOTWITHSTANDING THE RECENT PROGRESS IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PROCESS, SUFFICIENT INFO IS STILL NOT AVAILABLE
TO COMPUTE THE FY 04/05 PAY ADJUSTMENT.
I would guess "NO"
- Reaction score
- 8,040
- Points
- 1,360
Of course all of those who whined incessantly about " putting up with strikers blocking,etc" :crybaby: [ you know who you are 
]are going to sign over any raise you receive to a worthwhile charity right?
Alas I fear you will just enjoy the raise even though YOU never had to give up a couple of paycheques to get it.
...and for those who took the strike in stride[when you do get it], ENJOY!
]are going to sign over any raise you receive to a worthwhile charity right? Alas I fear you will just enjoy the raise even though YOU never had to give up a couple of paycheques to get it.
...and for those who took the strike in stride[when you do get it], ENJOY!
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Money in the bank. Your not missing it and when it comes it will be a welcome surprise. Doubtful it will happen prior to Xmas though.
Lance Wiebe
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 230
Bruce, that is idiocy. To let an organisation hold the military hostage, all because the military pay is based on some benchmark civil servant pays is idiocy. Should never be allowed to happen! It affected training, preperations for deployments, and shipping of military goods.
I'm glad that there's not more like you out there. With your attitude, the military might as well go out and strike to support the picketers.
No organisation should have been allowed to do what they did, without going to jail. They broke the law, pure and simple.
I'm glad that there's not more like you out there. With your attitude, the military might as well go out and strike to support the picketers.
No organisation should have been allowed to do what they did, without going to jail. They broke the law, pure and simple.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
I think any anger in this topic is misplaced, and should be aimed at the Treasury Board (TB).
I'm sorry, but I have to agree with Bruce. The strike was legal, and wasn't performed on Military property, apart from those areas that were given permission from the military organization of which was being picketed. Ultimately, it wasn't the Military of which was being picketed against, but more-so the TB. Disruptions to an organisation is what strikes are made to accomplish...that way the union gets the attention they require to get their demands to the Bargaining Table. To top it all off, if not for the PSAC Union (and required strike action), I would be probably living well under the poverty line. I've lived through the many uncomfortable years of the "Wage/Incentive Freeze" and I must say that I am living quite comfortably now, in contrast. I have to ask, "Where would I now be if not for the PSAC action against the TB ????"
Not to be misunderstood, as I too was adversely affected by the strike. But I can't help but think it was necessary (especially when I get my pay raise). If the TB had taken things seriously in the first place, this would all be a non-issue.
I'm sorry, but I have to agree with Bruce. The strike was legal, and wasn't performed on Military property, apart from those areas that were given permission from the military organization of which was being picketed. Ultimately, it wasn't the Military of which was being picketed against, but more-so the TB. Disruptions to an organisation is what strikes are made to accomplish...that way the union gets the attention they require to get their demands to the Bargaining Table. To top it all off, if not for the PSAC Union (and required strike action), I would be probably living well under the poverty line. I've lived through the many uncomfortable years of the "Wage/Incentive Freeze" and I must say that I am living quite comfortably now, in contrast. I have to ask, "Where would I now be if not for the PSAC action against the TB ????"
Not to be misunderstood, as I too was adversely affected by the strike. But I can't help but think it was necessary (especially when I get my pay raise). If the TB had taken things seriously in the first place, this would all be a non-issue.
Lance Wiebe
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 230
The strike was legal, no question.
The actions of the strikers was illegal. That is what bothers me the most. We turned a blind eye to their illegal activities, all the while rationalising the illegalities with "well, their strikeing for me too".
Consider for a moment. If it was the employees of LM or Royal Lepage, conducting these strikes, would we have allowed them for one minute to do what was done by the PSAC people?
The actions of the strikers was illegal. That is what bothers me the most. We turned a blind eye to their illegal activities, all the while rationalising the illegalities with "well, their strikeing for me too".
Consider for a moment. If it was the employees of LM or Royal Lepage, conducting these strikes, would we have allowed them for one minute to do what was done by the PSAC people?
- Reaction score
- 8,040
- Points
- 1,360
What exactly are we talking about here, Lance?
So far you have just a [loosly woven] blanket accusation.
If your going to say blocked traffic, then that has already passed court tests. Now if you can show me illegal acts that were done than yes I agree, criminal charges are in order, to the person doing the act, not "those guys".
So far you have just a [loosly woven] blanket accusation.
If your going to say blocked traffic, then that has already passed court tests. Now if you can show me illegal acts that were done than yes I agree, criminal charges are in order, to the person doing the act, not "those guys".
Lance Wiebe
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 230
I am talking specifically about refusing entrance to DND facilities. They actually turned contractors around, by contractors I am talking about food delivery trucks, laundry services, garbage trucks and so on. They were, literally, controlling access to the base. Not only that, soldiers in civilian clothing who refused to show their ID card were denied access. Complaints directed toward the MP's and RCMP were directed to the PAFFO. Say what?
And the military even helped. Set up tents and provided porta-potties. What rubbish.
And the military even helped. Set up tents and provided porta-potties. What rubbish.
- Reaction score
- 8,040
- Points
- 1,360
Lance,
You're dancing again.....
QUOTE,
1.They actually turned contractors around, by contractors I am talking about food delivery trucks, laundry services, garbage trucks
2.Not only that, soldiers in civilian clothing who refused to show their ID card were denied access.
3.Complaints directed toward the MP's and RCMP were directed to the PAFFO
4. And the military even helped.
1.What they physically ripped the driver from his cab and stole the truck?
2.Under threat of what?...no one can be "forced" to show their ID, they can be asked. Maybe cette soldat just wanted a day off?
3.Sounds like a weak-kneed jelly-based military problem to me.
4.So in your opinion the military should be charged with aiding and abetting?
You're dancing again.....
QUOTE,
1.They actually turned contractors around, by contractors I am talking about food delivery trucks, laundry services, garbage trucks
2.Not only that, soldiers in civilian clothing who refused to show their ID card were denied access.
3.Complaints directed toward the MP's and RCMP were directed to the PAFFO
4. And the military even helped.
1.What they physically ripped the driver from his cab and stole the truck?
2.Under threat of what?...no one can be "forced" to show their ID, they can be asked. Maybe cette soldat just wanted a day off?
3.Sounds like a weak-kneed jelly-based military problem to me.
4.So in your opinion the military should be charged with aiding and abetting?
Lance Wiebe
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 230
I said they refused the contractor access to a DND site. Perhaps you missed that. They stood in front of the truck, and told him to turn around, or sit there and block traffic all day. That is illegal.
Military personnel do not have to show their ID to a plumber in order to get to their place of employment.
For the military to let these illegal activities happen, then yes, someone in the military had to make the decision to let the srikers do what they did. Otherwise, the BDF could have sorted things out rather quickly.
There's no sense in continuing this argument. We are both obviously at opposite ends of the argument, you'll not convince me that the strike was conducted in a legal manner, because it wasn't. To me, that is the root of the problem. You obviously see nothing wrong with anything they did. Nothing I say will change your mind, ergo,..... the end.
Military personnel do not have to show their ID to a plumber in order to get to their place of employment.
For the military to let these illegal activities happen, then yes, someone in the military had to make the decision to let the srikers do what they did. Otherwise, the BDF could have sorted things out rather quickly.
There's no sense in continuing this argument. We are both obviously at opposite ends of the argument, you'll not convince me that the strike was conducted in a legal manner, because it wasn't. To me, that is the root of the problem. You obviously see nothing wrong with anything they did. Nothing I say will change your mind, ergo,..... the end.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 260
Could you plese tell us WHERE this was?? In Borden i can garentee that nothing like this happened, mostly because there was at least 2 MP vehicles, and 3 MP's at the lines at all times. If you were walking onto the base, you could, if you were driving, you were subject to 20 mins open, 20 mins closed. This caused hours of delayes onto base(because of contruction shutting down the Angus gate aswell), but, it was well within the letter of the law.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
How about we get this back on topic instead of the strike.
Similar threads
