Author Topic: Retro Pay & Allow 1Apr 2014 - 1Apr 2017  (Read 209220 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 376,370
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,962
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #200 on: November 03, 2016, 15:27:25 »
Except that none of that is written anywhere, those benchmarks you are mentioning are just as anecdotal.  Unless you have a reference for that (please say you do because I've always wanted that reference).

I've also never understood the philosophy that equal work does not equate to equal pay that permeates so many regular force members.

Military personnel are not paid for their work (exclusively).  They are paid for what they may be called upon to do as well.  And since what the law dictates we can call on Reg and Res to do are two different sets, it is reasonable for there to be differing compensation.

As for the setting of compensation rates: the majority of the information I once could access has been lost to the vagaries of the DWAN...  and I know you will be shocked to learn that the current websites provide little specific information on the Reserve Force.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 63,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,338
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #201 on: November 03, 2016, 15:36:05 »
Again, anecdotal.  As Class B pers can be called on to do any variety of tasks that they might have to do.  Full time cadre being sent away to teach at Battle School for example for 4 months at a time.  If you compare pay to the PS the percentage difference is three times smaller than for reservists working full time.

Interesting note, that Class A on a day for day basis gets about the same amount as his regular force counterpart due to PILL (almost 15% but not quite) but the Class B type does not.   Different kettle I know but interesting none the less.
Optio

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,859
  • It's all good
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #202 on: November 03, 2016, 15:46:37 »
Except that none of that is written anywhere, those benchmarks you are mentioning are just as anecdotal.  Unless you have a reference for that (please say you do because I've always wanted that reference).

I've also never understood the philosophy that equal work does not equate to equal pay that permeates so many regular force members.

Here is a non-anecdote.  I have moved 15 times in 23 years with this wife, three of them OUTCAN, and am currently on my fifth tour.  I may have not earned that "extra 15%", but my wife and son sure have.
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 43,409
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,689
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #203 on: November 03, 2016, 16:00:07 »
Again, anecdotal.  As Class B pers can be called on to do any variety of tasks that they might have to do.  Full time cadre being sent away to teach at Battle School for example for 4 months at a time.  If you compare pay to the PS the percentage difference is three times smaller than for reservists working full time.

A member on Class C employment aboard a deployed frigate has a really shitty command team who makes the deployment just miserable. So, he up and cancels his contract and flies home at the next port.

Can any RegF member do that?
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Staff Weenie

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 12,250
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 312
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #204 on: November 03, 2016, 16:13:10 »
Over a decade ago, I wrote a letter to DQOL (I believe it was Col Mann at the time), asking for an explanation of the 15% pay difference. I was involved in a project, part of which looked at compensation for Reservists in other mid to large sized NATO partners. Canada had, and still has, the most significant gap between Reg and Res for compensation. For example, the Territorials in the UK make 95% (the 5% is called the 'X Factor' and was very well determined), and when they go 'full time' there is no pay gap. I wanted to know why our pay gap existed, and what it was based upon, as all I had heard was anecdotal.

DQOL's answer was that prior to the Reserves Get Well project in the late 1980's, the gap was almost 40% on average (across various ranks and MOS). The Get Well project compared a number of MOS, primarily Cbt Arms, primarily Pte-MCpl. They looked at the CTP and the CTS for courses such as QL3 and QL4, and found that on average the Res F mbr was trained to 85% of the Reg F mbr. This was the key criteria in determining the pay gap.

I did reply back that this seemed to be outdated, as many courses have become common Reg/Res. As well, speaking for my very limited world, we don't train GDMO, GDNO, Soc W, Physio, Pharmacy, even Padre. They get trained and licensed through civilian institutions.  In many cases, the Res F mbr sees a far broader range of patients, and illnesses, and can be more clinically competent than their Reg F counterpart.

All that to say, it has nothing to do with postings, or deployments, or any of the other rumours that always fly around. There is also, as far as I can tell, absolutely no appetite to ever revisit this.

Offline PMedMoe

    is now a flat-faced civvy.... :).

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 246,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,022
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #205 on: November 03, 2016, 16:40:03 »
In many cases, the Res F mbr sees a far broader range of patients, and illnesses, and can be more clinically competent than their Reg F counterpart.

And that is probably primarily due to their civilian job.
"A good traveler has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving".
~ Lao Tzu~

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 63,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,338
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #206 on: November 03, 2016, 16:54:21 »
So far none of the explanations listed in the last few posts is supported by any policy and or guideline or directives.  Just opinions and feelings.

The AG looked into it and found that there is nothing to support that disparity in pay.

http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_201602_05_e_41249.html

Section 5.59


And DND agreed with that finding.  It also agreed to review the TOS for reservists.  When that will happen who knows.

The easiest explanation is money and not much else.

Optio

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 169,130
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,916
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #207 on: November 03, 2016, 18:23:12 »
So far none of the explanations listed in the last few posts is supported by any policy and or guideline or directives.  Just opinions and feelings.

The AG looked into it and found that there is nothing to support that disparity in pay.

http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_201602_05_e_41249.html

Section 5.59


And DND agreed with that finding.  It also agreed to review the TOS for reservists.  When that will happen who knows.

The easiest explanation is money and not much else.

Dead link.

Reservists who perform a truly equivalent RegF posn are placed on Class C.  Guess what the Class C pay rate is?  Hint:  Starts with "H" and rhymes with "undred percent."

You conveniently glossed over PPCLI Guy's post...Class B cannot be forcibly posted somewhere they don't want to go, amongst other differences.

:2c:

Regards
G2G

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 63,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,338
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #208 on: November 03, 2016, 19:36:39 »
Dead link.

Reservists who perform a truly equivalent RegF posn are placed on Class C.  Guess what the Class C pay rate is?  Hint:  Starts with "H" and rhymes with "undred percent."

You conveniently glossed over PPCLI Guy's post...Class B cannot be forcibly posted somewhere they don't want to go, amongst other differences.

:2c:

Regards
G2G

I didn't gloss over it.  The argument much like your class C argument is irrelevant as it still does not explain the pay disparity.  It's an opinion.  If your baseline is what you consider to truly be a regular force position then there are plenty of regular force people who should be paid reserve pay.  Or are all those class b backfills not truly regular force positions?

I'm not saying that regs and reserves need to be equal in terms of pay.  CLass A is different kettle of fish.  long term class B is what is the weird thing as to why there is a 15% when the factor is 6%.  What I am saying from the beginning is that nothing anywhere actually outlines the reason.  I'm happy to be corrected.  Just show me. 

Again, pay is determined by the PS pay with a factor added.  That factor is much less than the 15%.  I believe it is set at 6%. 

http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_201602_05_e_41249.html

AG link again.  Hoepefully works.  But here is the copied part of the report.

5.59 Army Reserve soldiers (and any other Reservists) may accept contracts for full-time service with their units, with Army headquarters, or elsewhere in National Defence. These contracts are for periods of 180 days to three years, and can be renewed for much longer periods. While Army Reserve soldiers working under such contracts for up to three years could be regarded as not employed on a continuing full-time basis, in our view, Army Reserve soldiers engaged on such contracts for more than three years are employed on a continuing full-time basis. This is inconsistent with the National Defence Act, which states that Primary Reserve members are enrolled for other than continuing full-time military service when not on active service undertaking emergency duties for the defence of Canada or deployed on international missions. National Defence has, in effect, created a class of soldiers that does not exist in the Act. Furthermore, these soldiers receive 85 percent of the salary and lesser benefits than Regular Army soldiers would receive for the same work.

And DND's response.

5.62Recommendation. National Defence should review the terms of service of Army Reserve soldiers, and the contracts of full-time Army Reserve soldiers, to ensure that it is in compliance with the National Defence Act.

National Defence’s response. Agreed. The Canadian Armed Forces will review the framework for the Reserve Force terms of service and the administration of Reserve Force service to ensure it complies with the National Defence Act and the regulations enacted under it.

For me there should be two classes. Full time and part time.  TOS should be clear for each. 

Optio

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,859
  • It's all good
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #209 on: November 03, 2016, 20:16:33 »
I didn't gloss over it.  The argument much like your class C argument is irrelevant as it still does not explain the pay disparity.  It's an opinion.  If your baseline is what you consider to truly be a regular force position then there are plenty of regular force people who should be paid reserve pay.  Or are all those class b backfills not truly regular force positions?



For me there should be two classes. Full time and part time.  TOS should be clear for each.

Three classes.  Part time, full time and geographically static (at 85%), and full time and mobile (at 100%).  Perhaps over 40% of Reg F would fit into the 85% class.....
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 63,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,338
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #210 on: November 03, 2016, 20:26:02 »
Three classes.  Part time, full time and geographically static (at 85%), and full time and mobile (at 100%).  Perhaps over 40% of Reg F would fit into the 85% class.....

That would make more sense.  Create a baseline pay and breakdown the Mil factor along those lines. 
Optio

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 35,173
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,461
  • Ready Aye Ready
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #211 on: November 03, 2016, 20:29:09 »
Three classes.  Part time, full time and geographically static (at 85%), and full time and mobile (at 100%).  Perhaps over 40% of Reg F would fit into the 85% class.....

How do you define a reg force member being geographically static in your hypothesis ?
« Last Edit: November 03, 2016, 20:42:23 by Halifax Tar »
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way

Offline Lumber

  • Donor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 43,409
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,689
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #212 on: November 03, 2016, 21:07:51 »
How do you define a reg force member being geographically static in your hypothesis ?

Number of posts on milnet.ca...

 ;D
"Aboard his ship, there is nothing outside a captain's control." - Captain Sir Edward Pellew

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

Death before dishonour! Nothing before coffee!

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 35,173
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,461
  • Ready Aye Ready
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #213 on: November 03, 2016, 21:10:15 »
Number of posts on milnet.ca...

 ;D

Lol that's 1 way...
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 169,130
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,916
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #214 on: November 03, 2016, 21:40:24 »
I didn't gloss over it.  The argument much like your class C argument is irrelevant as it still does not explain the pay disparity.  It's an opinion.  If your baseline is what you consider to truly be a regular force position then there are plenty of regular force people who should be paid reserve pay.  Or are all those class b backfills not truly regular force positions?

I'm not saying that regs and reserves need to be equal in terms of pay.  CLass A is different kettle of fish.  long term class B is what is the weird thing as to why there is a 15% when the factor is 6%.  What I am saying from the beginning is that nothing anywhere actually outlines the reason.  I'm happy to be corrected.  Just show me. 

Again, pay is determined by the PS pay with a factor added.  That factor is much less than the 15%.  I believe it is set at 6%. 

...For me there should be two classes. Full time and part time.  TOS should be clear for each.

Why, when the PS has three classes?  Indeterminate, Term and Casual.  Casual hires are paid at the minimum rate of the classification, per TB policy.  Why don't they get paid at higher rates like Term and Indeterminate public servants?

You seem to brush off Class A.  Why shouldn't a Class A Reservist be paid at a daily rate equivalent of 100% RegF pay?

Would you have an issue with the CAF changing the employment location of a Class B Reservist for the remainder of their term, and requiring that Reservist to move to the new work location?

Regards
G2G

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,859
  • It's all good
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #215 on: November 03, 2016, 22:06:26 »
How do you define a reg force member being geographically static in your hypothesis ?

Say no to one posting, or indicate that you need to stay static. and voila - 85% pay.  Volunteer to be moved, go to your new posting, and voila, 100% pay.
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 63,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,338
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #216 on: November 03, 2016, 22:11:26 »
Why, when the PS has three classes?  Indeterminate, Term and Casual.  Casual hires are paid at the minimum rate of the classification, per TB policy.  Why don't they get paid at higher rates like Term and Indeterminate public servants?

You seem to brush off Class A.  Why shouldn't a Class A Reservist be paid at a daily rate equivalent of 100% RegF pay?

Would you have an issue with the CAF changing the employment location of a Class B Reservist for the remainder of their term, and requiring that Reservist to move to the new work location?

Regards
G2G

Term is essentially your class b.  Paid the same.

You also forgot indeterminate that can work part time.  No difference in pay.

Casuals are not employees of the federal public service and are not subject to nor hired under the public service employee act.

Reference http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/psm-fpfm/staffing-dotation/psw-efp/ocas-eng.asp

Reservists are hired under and are subject to the NDA. 

You see, it is clearly outlined and directed by policy and guidelines. 

Reserve pay is not.  Or at least the 15% justification isn't. 


  If you are suggesting that class B and class a get paid at the same rate as the lowest incentive level of that rank then they would still be ahead.

It's not a question of brushing off class A.  They have different TOS that the reg force.  As I said, it shouldn't necessarily be equal but it should be closer to what the military factor is.  That's what compensates the regular member for postings.
Optio

Offline Humphrey Bogart

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 89,244
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,554
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #217 on: November 03, 2016, 22:37:18 »
Say no to one posting, or indicate that you need to stay static. and voila - 85% pay.  Volunteer to be moved, go to your new posting, and voila, 100% pay.

This would violate so many human rights laws it isn't even funny.  A more realistic option would be the CAF, particularly the officer corps, having a more flexible contract scheme.  My 13 years are up in 18 months and I've indicated already I won't be resigning my TOS because the only option is 25.  Does my pay drop if I refuse to be posted in the APS, for a seven month posting?  In what world does that make sense?  The way the military manages its people is already fubared enough and that idea is quite frankly ridiculous. 

Offline Ludoc

  • Member
  • ****
  • 11,305
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 116
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #218 on: November 03, 2016, 22:37:42 »
I didn't gloss over it.  The argument much like your class C argument is irrelevant as it still does not explain the pay disparity.  It's an opinion.  If your baseline is what you consider to truly be a regular force position then there are plenty of regular force people who should be paid reserve pay.  Or are all those class b backfills not truly regular force positions?

I'm not saying that regs and reserves need to be equal in terms of pay.  CLass A is different kettle of fish.  long term class B is what is the weird thing as to why there is a 15% when the factor is 6%.  What I am saying from the beginning is that nothing anywhere actually outlines the reason.  I'm happy to be corrected.  Just show me. 

Again, pay is determined by the PS pay with a factor added.  That factor is much less than the 15%.  I believe it is set at 6%. 

http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_201602_05_e_41249.html

AG link again.  Hoepefully works.  But here is the copied part of the report.

5.59 Army Reserve soldiers (and any other Reservists) may accept contracts for full-time service with their units, with Army headquarters, or elsewhere in National Defence. These contracts are for periods of 180 days to three years, and can be renewed for much longer periods. While Army Reserve soldiers working under such contracts for up to three years could be regarded as not employed on a continuing full-time basis, in our view, Army Reserve soldiers engaged on such contracts for more than three years are employed on a continuing full-time basis. This is inconsistent with the National Defence Act, which states that Primary Reserve members are enrolled for other than continuing full-time military service when not on active service undertaking emergency duties for the defence of Canada or deployed on international missions. National Defence has, in effect, created a class of soldiers that does not exist in the Act. Furthermore, these soldiers receive 85 percent of the salary and lesser benefits than Regular Army soldiers would receive for the same work.

And DND's response.

5.62Recommendation. National Defence should review the terms of service of Army Reserve soldiers, and the contracts of full-time Army Reserve soldiers, to ensure that it is in compliance with the National Defence Act.

National Defence’s response. Agreed. The Canadian Armed Forces will review the framework for the Reserve Force terms of service and the administration of Reserve Force service to ensure it complies with the National Defence Act and the regulations enacted under it.

For me there should be two classes. Full time and part time.  TOS should be clear for each.
I don't know what you are trying to prove with your link. Except for one throw away sentence at the end of the AG's link there is no mention of Reserve pay. DND didn't even acknowledge it.

The entirety of the rest of your quotes were about Reservists getting too much class B time. The AG said there should not be long term class B contracts as that creates a type of soldier not authorized to exist (the full time reservist). DND agreed. The solution is no more long term class B contracts, not paying Reservists more.

I`m not sure I necessarily agree with that position but that is the logical leap one takes from reading the quotes you posted.

Offline Halifax Tar

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 35,173
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,461
  • Ready Aye Ready
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #219 on: November 03, 2016, 22:45:31 »
Say no to one posting, or indicate that you need to stay static. and voila - 85% pay.  Volunteer to be moved, go to your new posting, and voila, 100% pay.

People can say no to postings ?  Don't get me wrong I've known lots of people with short assignment histories on their mprr but they never said no, they were protected, or they had "issues" that kept then "static".

What about a hard sea trade who works within the home port division matrix ? 

What is static ?  A bos'n can spend 30 years in Halifax but I would highly disagree that they were static.

I agree with where you going,  I just think it needs to be tuned a little.
Lead me, follow me or get the hell out of my way

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 169,130
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,916
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #220 on: November 03, 2016, 22:51:10 »
Term is essentially your class b.  Paid the same.

You also forgot indeterminate that can work part time.  No difference in pay.

Didn't forget, just another way of looking at things.  So if you want to play the "should be the same as PS but with mil factor," are you saying Class B terms should only be 90 days max, like in the PS?

Offline PPCLI Guy

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 128,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,859
  • It's all good
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #221 on: November 04, 2016, 00:13:14 »
This would violate so many human rights laws it isn't even funny.  A more realistic option would be the CAF, particularly the officer corps, having a more flexible contract scheme.  My 13 years are up in 18 months and I've indicated already I won't be resigning my TOS because the only option is 25.  Does my pay drop if I refuse to be posted in the APS, for a seven month posting?  In what world does that make sense?  The way the military manages its people is already fubared enough and that idea is quite frankly ridiculous.

You know me, and you know that I am trying to make a point.  We have entirely too many officers who simply do not move, for one reason or another.......like say, in Kingston.  Why should they get full pay, when they are essentially long term Class Bs?  Why do some people have to do all of the moves, while others have stability in their lives?

As to human rights, are you suggesting that our mobility policy violates human rights?  That my rights have been routinely violated in my career?

On the TOS topic, I agree with you.  We have 1950s HR practices in the 21st century.  I actually believe that we need full permeability between Reg F service (whereby you are subject to moves), Full time geo-static, and part time.  I also believe that we need a model that accepts that the youth of today expect to have 7-9 jobs in their lives - and then do all that we can to ensure that 3-5 of them are in the military.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2016, 01:26:54 by PPCLI Guy »
"The higher the rank, the more necessary it is that boldness should be accompanied by a reflective mind....for with increase in rank it becomes always a matter less of self-sacrifice and more a matter of the preservation of others, and the good of the whole."

Karl von Clausewitz

Offline Remius

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 63,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,338
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #222 on: November 04, 2016, 06:06:39 »
Didn't forget, just another way of looking at things.  So if you want to play the "should be the same as PS but with mil factor," are you saying Class B terms should only be 90 days max, like in the PS?

 Actually you didn't even look at it. 

You need to educate yourself on how the PS works with regards to employment.

Ive already explained that casuals are not employees of the public service nor are they hired under the PSEA.

90 days is the max for casuals.

  Terms can be up to three years just like class B.

So yes it should be the same.  But guess what? After three years term employees have to be appointed to the PS as indeterminate employees.  That should also be the same.  Want to work for a three year contract and continue again? Then you CT. 
Optio

Offline Monsoon

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 21,910
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 770
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #223 on: November 04, 2016, 06:50:58 »
So yes it should be the same.  But guess what? After three years term employees have to be appointed to the PS as indeterminate employees.  That should also be the same.  Want to work for a three year contract and continue again? Then you CT.
What always gives me a chuckle is the number of Reg F folks who don't realize that that's exactly what most long-term class "B" folks would be most happy with. What keeps people on long-term class "B":

- CTs delayed by inadequacies with our 1950s-era HR management processes; and
- A desire not to be demoted and have to spend a year or more retraining to continue to do substantially the same work they were doing while on class "B".

And that's it. The mythical long-term class "B" guys/gals who are motivated to live on 180 day contracts at a 15% pay disadvantage and substantially reduced benefits because they don't want to get posted once every three or four years - I've never met 'em.

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 192,475
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,531
Re: Pay Raise (2014 - 2016) & Back Pay
« Reply #224 on: November 04, 2016, 07:56:24 »
It a PS goes over three years as term, they become indeterminant.  So you want all Cl B reservists to get 100% pay and a posting message when they get to three years and a day?