The Death Benefit For Single Members Merged Thread

[vonGarvin]

For fuck's sakes (pardon my use of the Anglo Saxon).

The money, the 250K, is to replace lost wages to the dependent families of the fallen, not some sort of macabre lottery for the wives/brothers/sisters/aunts and other grieving members.


:rage:

 

[PMedMoe]

The money, the 250K, is to replace lost wages to the dependent families of the fallen, not some sort of macabre lottery for the wives/brothers/sisters/aunts and other grieving members.

Completely agree.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

First, this First, this ....

A discrimination case involving the family of single soldier killed five years ago in Afghanistan was thrown out when Veterans Affairs abruptly declared Cpl. Matthew Dinning had a previously unrecognized common-law spouse and child.

The revelation shocked his parents and brother, who were challenging the federal government's policy of paying a $250,000 lump-sum death benefit only to the families of married soldiers.

The case was dismissed by a human rights tribunal last Friday in a written decision, obtained by The Canadian Press.

Lincoln Dinning, Matthew's father, said he would never have filed the human rights complaint, which alleged the government discriminated against single soldiers, had there been a spouse in the picture at the outset.

The decision by Veterans Affairs to recognize Tanya Lowerison as an entitled spouse occurred in June, well after the conclusion of a public hearing into the discrimination case last spring.

Lawyers for the federal department subsequently argued that there was no basis for the complaint since Matthew Dinning was technically no longer a single soldier.

The tribunal agreed.

"I am disappointed by the ruling of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal dismissing my case, but I am not at all surprised," said Lincoln Dinning, who was required to keep silent about last summer's decision until the commission had ruled

........Canadian Press, 29 Nov 11

.... now, this:

Quote
The families of at least four unmarried soldiers killed in Afghanistan have stepped forward to file human-rights complaints.

The relatives allege Veterans Affairs discriminates in favour of married troops in the payment of a $250,000 death benefit, The Canadian Press has learned.

The cases, which are at the investigation stage, follow the dismissal last week of a similar complaint by the parents of Cpl. Matthew Dinning, who died in an April 2006 Kandahar roadside bombing.

A federal human-rights tribunal rejected the complaint of Lincoln and Laurie Dinning because Veterans Affairs abruptly decided to recognize their son's girlfriend as his common-law spouse, technically making him no longer single.

Errol Cushley, the father of Pte. William Cushley, and Beverley Skalrud, the mother of Pte. Braun Scott Woodfield, confirmed they have launched their own challenges of the death stipend, which was instituted as part of an overhaul of veterans benefits in 2006.

The families of Trooper Jack Bouthillier and Trooper March Diab have launched similar complaints.

"You have four men killed in the same battle, three of them are paid $250,000, (but) William does not qualify because he is single. It doesn't make any sense to me," said Errol Cushley, who lives near Wallaceburg, Ont.

"I always understood you couldn't discriminate on those grounds." ....

Canadian Press, 30 Nov 11

Don't we already have a thread dealing with this subject??

 

[mariomike]

"The Death Benefit For Single Members Merged Thread":
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/41700/post-1028189/topicseen.html#msg1028189

 

[Occam]

For frig's sakes (pardon my use of the Anglo Saxon).

The money, the 250K, is to replace lost wages to the dependent families of the fallen, not some sort of macabre lottery for the wives/brothers/sisters/aunts and other grieving members.


:rage:

I (and VAC) disagree with your description of the award's intent.

From VAC's website:

Disability Award

The Disability Award is a one-time, tax-free cash award designed to compensate for the non-economic impacts of a service-related disability such as pain and suffering.

Now I will agree with you that I don't think they had this in mind when they drafted the NVC, but the can of worms has been opened.

If a soldier is injured as a result of military service, he is paid a disability award.  If he dies as a result of military service, is he paid the disability award (which then falls to the estate), or is the spouse paid the disability award?

I think that's the argument you're going to see used here.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1104432--no-equality-in-not-paying-death-benefit-to-single-soldiers-says-father


No equality’ in not paying death benefit to single soldiers, says father

Published On Mon Dec 19 2011
Richard J. BrennanNational Affairs Writer

James Pentland says he finds it despicable that his Canadian soldier son Patrick gave up his life for his country in Afghanistan but in death is treated as a second-class soldier.

Pentland, who was a soldier for 25 years, is adding his voice to those, including the Royal Canadian Legion, calling for Veterans Affairs to start paying out the one-time $250,000 death benefit for single soldiers.
“To give it to the married person, the common-law person and then turn round and tell the family of the single soldier that his life . . . didn’t mean as much. There is no equality there. The single soldier is discriminated against,” Pentland told the Toronto Star in a telephone interview from his home in Geary, N.B.

“I find it insulting and degrading that you and I are even having this conservation. I find this is reprehensible that I have to talk about this because our government is not showing the single soldier the same respect and courtesy . . . the reality comes down to the fact they didn’t do a damn thing to give equal benefits to the family of the single soldiers,” he said.

Trooper Patrick James Pentland, 23, of the Royal Canadian Dragoons based in Petawawa, Ont., was killed when the armoured vehicle he was riding in hit an improvised explosive device (IED) about 38 kilometres west of Kandahar in 2007.
“My wife has never gotten over this . . . she still has her crying sessions,” Pentland said.

While the senior Pentland is waging a one-man battle of Veterans Affairs, the families of at least four other soldiers killed in Afghanistan have filed human-rights complaints, arguing that Veterans Affairs discriminated against their late sons because they were not married.
The federal department claims the death benefit is intended to help families of married soldiers re-establish themselves in civilian life.

“Although other family members, such as parents, also suffer from the loss due to the sudden death of the Canadian Forces member, they do not face the same financial impacts as the spouse/common-law partner and/or dependent children of the Canadian Forces member,” Janice Summerby, a spokeswoman for Veterans Affairs Canada, said in an email statement to the Star.

Summerby added that single soldiers can choose to take out life insurance and make payable, for example, to his or her parents or estate. That kind of insurance can only be obtained through the Service Income Security Insurance Plan (SISIP) Long Term Disability, a government-directed insurance program for the Canadian Forces.
But the Royal Canadian Legion, representing 340,000 members across the country, said the one-time death benefit is clearly meant to cover pain and suffering, not economic loss, which is covered other benefit packages.

“It is one of the deficiencies that we identified in the new Veterans’ Charter . . . that it is a discriminatory practice that married members receive a death benefit but single members don’t receive a death benefit. The Legion believes that all Canadian forces members killed (in the line of duty) … be granted a death benefit,” Andrea Siew, of the Royal Canadian Legion in Ottawa, told the Star.

Siew said the death benefit is not about financial compensation for the loss of income, “it is an award payment for the non-economic loss associated with pain and suffering. It is very clear in the legislation it’s about that.”

 

[maniac]

The true injustice here is the families of the fallen who were "SINGLE", do not receive this benefit at all.  The only way the death benefit is paid is if they are married or CL and they will even pay it to a child of the fallen.  They will NOT pay it to a soldier who has not declared the above.  I don't know the rationale behind that decision but it is being challenged in the London ON courts by 4 x families of the fallen where this has taken place.

 

[PMedMoe]

I don't know the rationale behind that decision but it is being challenged in the London ON courts by 4 x families of the fallen where this has taken place.

I would suggest the rationale is that a single soldier (without spouse or children) does not have anyone dependent on them for their livelihood.  Not saying it's right but check out worker's insurance (at least in Ontario).  Pretty sure there's no provision for parents or siblings.  Only spouse and children.

Edit to add:  See this reply:

For fuck's sakes (pardon my use of the Anglo Saxon).

The money, the 250K, is to replace lost wages to the dependent families of the fallen, not some sort of macabre lottery for the wives/brothers/sisters/aunts and other grieving members.


:rage:

 

[vonGarvin]

That is all.

 

[PMedMoe]

That is all.

:nod:

 

[vonGarvin]

(There was vacant space above what I had typed, which is about all I give a fuck about single persons complaining about not getting the benefits of married persons.)

 

[mariomike]

Their lawyers may be looking at the lobbying for a national $300,000 ( indexed ) Public Safety Officer Compensation (PSOC) LODD benefit:
"M-100 — June 6, 2011 — Ms. Davies (Vancouver East) — That, in the opinion of the House, the government should consider establishing a federally-funded Canadian public safety officer compensation fund payable to the survivors of a firefighter, police or public safety officer killed, or permanently disabled, in the line of duty."

This would be in addition to the negotiated survivor and disability benefits in the collective agreement.