Liberals Want Injured to Keep Getting Danger Pay Back in Canada

[the 48th regulator]

And here is the crux of what HOM just described.  What if this injury affects him 2,5 or10 years down the line?  You think it will be easy to prove it is attributed to the wound?  :rofl: Here is my message to the MP raising a fuss.  Look deaper into the agenda they are raising, as opposed to getting news time.

HOM, I am going to PM you tonight we will talk.

dileas

tess

 

[cplcaldwell]

There's another bit to it.

I can see that the pay is given as a result of being in a dangerous place.

But in a sense, members who are injured, presumably through no fault of their own, and possibly as a result of doing their job a bit too diligently, are penalized for it.

I mean after all, those still 'stuck in' are getting the $, at best they ducked at the right time , whereas the other guy, who was either 'wrong place wrong time' or 'pushing the envelope' a bit is now stuck at home watching Oprah, or wasting his time reading this, as the case may be... and no extra $'s.

Just wanted to toss that out there.....

 

[FredDaHead]

There's another bit to it.

I can see that the pay is given as a result of being in a dangerous place.

But in a sense, members who are injured, presumably through no fault of their own, and possibly as a result of doing their job a bit too diligently, are penalized for it.

I mean after all, those still 'stuck in' are getting the $, at best they ducked at the right time , whereas the other guy, who was either 'wrong place wrong time' or 'pushing the envelope' a bit is now stuck at home watching Oprah, or wasting his time reading this, as the case may be... and no extra $'s.

Just wanted to toss that out there.....

I agree, but what about those (few/none, just a thought game) who get hurt in training, through careless, or for "reasons other than combat"? Do you go with some kind of blanket coverage whereas everyone who gets out of theater with any kind of injury gets danger pay up to the date their tour would have ended, or do you write into the law a clause that if the member was hurt outside training, or through their own fault, they don't get the danger pay?

I don't think anyone willingly gets hurt and I'm sure all our boys and girls overseas are careful enough to not get hurt through negligence, but you know there's always going to be the one asshat who will and try to collect the money while his buddies are still out there.

And are you saying a certain member of this forum actually watches Oprah? You might as well start questionning his manliness outright, boyo!

 

[2 Cdo]

As for the continuation of ALLOWANCES, I personally think that once out of theatre for whatever reasons then the allowances should cease.  as others have mentioned, why didn't the good liberal bring up this issue when his party was in power? Or is it only an issue because a family member is affected? Either way, political b*ll masquerading as concern for the troops, typical liberal hypocrite! :threat:

 

[cplcaldwell]

....but what about those (few/none, just a thought game) who get hurt in training, through careless, or for "reasons other than combat"? Do you go with some kind of blanket coverage whereas everyone who gets out of theater with any kind of injury gets danger pay up to the date their tour would have ended, or do you write into the law a clause that if the member was hurt outside training, or through their own fault, they don't get the danger pay?

Exactly, so the whole exercise of where to draw the line becomes rather a bugger doesn't it!

I say give everyone a raise to the level of their Rank and IPC as if they were in theatre, make it the normal 15th and 30th trip and scrap danger pay altogether, and it'll be all okay....will start drafting memo to Treasury Board now!

 

[warrickdll]

No one dislikes extra pay. But pay allotted to any CF member based on days in a danger zone, days overseas, days in the field, days at sea, and so on, are not meant to cover any other situation but that which is specified.

It should not matter whether an individual's expected 6 month tour ends after only 1 day because of a death in the family, an injury, a wound, a required posting, or just because the tour ended early, the extra pay and benefits for the tour must end (or not be spent if the pay already went into your account).

Even pay for those hospitalized in Germany should be limited to overseas allowance, and not the actual in-theatre pay (though the 25 day extension is not egregious). As mentioned - No one dislikes extra pay - but these bonuses are not guaranteed, nor should they be. If you cannot go into the field, go to sea, dive, jump, fly, be in-theatre, then the bonuses for those activities/situations have to stop.


A different process covers permanent disabilities from wounds when it comes to money and benefits. And many complained of the system for previous CF operation, hopefully things have improved. As an aside, the latest Macleans mentions the casualties from Yugoslavia but states that none of them were from combat... Ahhh, Peacekeeping, I guess the belligerents just had a lot of NDs.

However, recoverable wounds, well you get paid even though you are temporarily unserviceable. It's not like they stop in-theatre bonuses to soldiers recovering in-theatre, or stop sea pay to someone recovering from injuries in Sick Bay.

What rationale would cover paying the same bonuses to someone recovering at home in Canada as someone recovering in Afghanistan? Should they now be receiving double bonuses?!

 

[armywife/cadetmom]

My humble opinion is (based on my husbands experience with this)  when you are injured over seas, being compensated by veterans affairs, isnt always easy, infact it can take YEARS...my husband was injured in Kosovo years back, and he still hasnt finished with dealing with them.  I believe that the soldiers should ATLEAST receive the perks for the remainder of the time they should have been over.  some families depend on that extra income, and to then have to face losing it, and their spouse being hurt....that has to suck.  My very personal opinion is that No Soldier should have to pay income tax.  Too many families are living pay to pay getting deeper in debt and the amount of $ paid in tax could really help families.  I know too many wives that are soo upset because there will be days left till payday, and there is no food in the house for their kids. or That the pay isnt enough to afford a car, so going by cab to town to get groceries takes a chunk making the pay go even less further.

 

[HItorMiss]

It's not really that hard as I see it. Member hurt in training gets nothing but what he/she was entitled to while in training and possibly through VAC if the injury is permanent. Members wounded on tour and forced to return to Canada get paid out the tour money for wounds received in contact with the enemy (to include direct contact, indirect fire, IED/mines) not to include injuries occurred to carelessness in the Rec facilities (scalding oneself with coffee, pulling muscles or hernias in the gym etc etc)There have a I covered everything.

I'm not canvassing for more money, and you're right the fact that this Liberal seems to politicising it is makes my job of selling this to you harder cause he is an a$$ hat. But I ask you why not, all politics aside I really think it's a good thing myself. One of the things I worried about most was finding a way to say overseas and failing that how do I get back as quick as possible, then next was when I get back what was I entitled to for compensation and money, the answer was SFA. That doesn't make sense to me.

 

[the 48th regulator]

I agree, but what about those (few/none, just a thought game) who get hurt in training, through careless, or for "reasons other than combat"? Do you go with some kind of blanket coverage whereas everyone who gets out of theater with any kind of injury gets danger pay up to the date their tour would have ended, or do you write into the law a clause that if the member was hurt outside training, or through their own fault, they don't get the danger pay?

I don't think anyone willingly gets hurt and I'm sure all our boys and girls overseas are careful enough to not get hurt through negligence, but you know there's always going to be the one asshat who will and try to collect the money while his buddies are still out there.

And are you saying a certain member of this forum actually watches Oprah? You might as well start questionning his manliness outright, boyo!

Do these injured in pretraining stay with the rear party people receive a medal for the operation? What about the wounded, do they receive one?

There is your criteria.

Injured in PT.....

dileas

tess

 

[HItorMiss]

Iterator, A member that recovers overseas keeps his pay, and right he should but the guy hurt to severe to recover overseas gets nothing. I'm not saying give the guy in hospital double I'm saying give the guy forced to leave to recover what the guy in hospital overseas is getting. The only difference between the two is one guys watches the clock move and the other sits staring at the ceiling wishing he was back overseas.

 

[2 Cdo]

My humble opinion is (based on my husbands experience with this)  when you are injured over seas, being compensated by veterans affairs, isnt always easy, infact it can take YEARS...my husband was injured in Kosovo years back, and he still hasnt finished with dealing with them.  I believe that the soldiers should ATLEAST receive the perks for the remainder of the time they should have been over.  some families depend on that extra income, and to then have to face losing it, and their spouse being hurt....that has to suck.  My very personal opinion is that No Soldier should have to pay income tax.  Too many families are living pay to pay getting deeper in debt and the amount of $ paid in tax could really help families.  I know too many wives that are soo upset because there will be days left till payday, and there is no food in the house for their kids. or That the pay isnt enough to afford a car, so going by cab to town to get groceries takes a chunk making the pay go even less further.

I myself was injured(not wounded) in Afghanistan in 2002 and in my dealings with DVA I had zero problems. Once all the paperwork was finished and sorted out I recieved my first check within a month. Things have improved over the years!

As for the issue of families depending on that extra pay, DON'T!  Budget as if you don't have that money as there are no guarentees that you will keep recieving it. As for not paying taxes, :boring: not even worth the effort to comment on. If a member of the CF is living paycheck to paycheck, rather then just give him more money(no taxes) maybe a little financial counselling to learn how to better budget. Living beyond ones means is the worst reason to give for not paying taxes! Sorry if that seems cold and harsh, it's not, it's just reality!

 

[HItorMiss]

+1
2Cdo,
You're bang on about the more pay and living in your means.

 

[cplcaldwell]

48th

The wounded do, the sick might and the injured might as long as ...

Regarding GCS and GSM...

... you have served honourably, you are eligible for either award, even if you were repatriated for medical reasons directly attributable to your service. Personnel who die during their service and whose deaths are attributable to that service are also eligible....

The Rear Party might...
Regarding the GSM

members and to members of allied forces working with the CF who deploy outside Canada and provide direct support on a full-time basis to operations in the presence of an armed enemy.

Mirage??(not sure stand to be corrected)

Duration factor in the latter case..

More on this link

 

[2 Cdo]

+1
2Cdo,
You're bang on about the more pay and living in your means.

Thanks, it is due to my own ignorance as a young troopie and having no money to my name only a day or two after payday that forced me to learn how to budget. I can happily say that with retirement looming next year the only debts I will have are my monthly utilities and property taxes! Oldest boy has moved out and I'm working on the youngest ;D! It's good to know that I won't HAVE to work ever again!(But I probably will)

 

[HItorMiss]

"to operations in the presence of an armed enemy."

Thats disqualifies Rear Party.

 

[warrickdll]

... The only difference between the two is one guys watches the clock move and the other sits at the ceiling wishing he was back overseas.

Well... The difference is location, location, location.

Hey, if you are offered extra money - take it.

The stoppage of bonuses is not meant as a punishment. And being returned for wounds is different than for other reasons, but the bonuses are for being there - not for wanting/hoping/expecting to be there.

But, as a policy, it wouldn't make sense to me that a CF member, who is still receiving their pay after all, should be paid extra because they have a recoverable wound. Especially not for the remaining duration of their tour.

Maybe the compromise would be a portion of the bonuses for all evacuated wounded for up to 25 days (or some other apparently random number)?

 

[HItorMiss]

You can argue location with me till your blue in the face. Wont change the fact that the men forced home should indeed be receiving their tour money or some form of compensation, because right now they get nothing. Well that's not true we get hooked to machines that make it so we can't leave our homes, we get hours of pain that even though our medication is free, the med barely cover the pain,  We get heaps of sympathy from those who don't have a clue as to what we have gone through, and we get removed from the guys who would do us the most good.

Sure the wounds are "Recoverabel" as you put it, bu I still believe that recoverable wounds need some sort of compensation and paying out the tour money would be just about right for all that they have to go through while "Recovering".

 

[3rd Herd]

I myself was injured(not wounded) in Afghanistan in 2002 and in my dealings with DVA I had zero problems. Once all the paperwork was finished and sorted out I received my first check within a month. Things have improved over the years!

Okay a couple of key points
1) Dealling with the VAC, depends on the case
2)Once the paperwork is finished and sorted out, can take years, thanks to 48th may not, especially the tip to get non-DND records.
3)Things have improved over the years, I will wait and see.
4) Going to University beats the heck out of watching Oprah all day
5)Find a good advocate, regimental associations are often a good source
6) Listen to the 48th, Danjou, and several others who have BTDT.
my two cents

 

[Comdessert]

I smell slippery slope and politicking.  Does the fact that the honourable member's own cousin was wounded that he is only now learning of this policy?

Hey there,

First post, be gentle fellas

It's a beautiful political maneuver, really. The Liberal Party gets to wrap itself in the flag and criticize (I believe unfairly) the current government for not caring about our injured soldiers. Never mind the fact that the Liberal Party was never a friend to the military, they get to hypocritically mudrake the Conservatives.

Let's hope it fails.

- CD

 

[Brad Sallows]

That's not what I wrote, and even if a policy came out tomorrow stating that those invalided out of theatre due to wounds would receive their hazard incentives for the duration, I would not expect anyone to risk a wound just to get out early - the risk of trading off the function of a limb for the rest of one's life isn't worth a few thousand bucks.

It's also worth observing, along with what I wrote earlier, that often the men in the thickest of the fighting would go so far as to commit offences to return to their units (eg. go AWOL from a convalescence centre and make their own way back).  So there are two sides to that coin, and judging by the comments in the media to date that hasn't changed.

And, the way soldiers are treated by various incarnations of so-called "Veterans' Affairs" organizations does piss me off.  The difficulty of obtaining just compensation for soldiers with permanent wound effects goes back hundreds of years.  It seems to be a parsimonious government tradition long observed.

But, the hazard pay should be due only as long as the risk for which it is established must be faced.  If there is to be compensation for wounds and illness and injury, it should be purely defined by the nature of the wound etc.  Otherwise there will be an ongoing bunfight over when an involuntary repatriation qualifies for hazard incentive payouts, and when it does not.