- Reaction score
Just make union activities a secondary duty. No dues.
Regardless, a CAF union would inevitably mean union dues. No way a union that size could function without money.Part of being an effective bullshitter is to never let people know when you're pulling a tail.
That would likely be something that would fall under collective bargaining.Which has no more push ability then you just gave it....
So PSAC has a formula used based on a percentage of your salary at the lower step and adds in other factors. But I would say double that easily if you were to use a Cpl's rate of pay as an equivalent.
Depends on your union. For a example a recent cheque I received which would equal roughly Cpl 4 military pay, there was $38.18 deducted from it. So monthly your looking at about $80 for a Cpl deducted, more as you earn more, less as you earn less. This year already I have paid over 1k in dues and it isn't done yet.
I guess it depends on what positions we are talking about. It may be that the CAF has high rank-low rank positions. So a Sgt/MCpl could still be a section commander or platoon warrant could be a Sgt/WO.One thing I found interesting when I made the transition from military to civilian life was that the first responders I worked with (all three services) wore the rank of the position they were filling, even for short periods of time. So a police Sgt would wear SSgt badges when filling in for his shift supervisor when he was on leave. There was no "promotion" involved and no paperwork drama. I don't know if they received the related extra pay or not. It always bothered me how often people in the CF were put into higher-ranked positions, often for extended periods of time, but equally often were not granted acting rank but just soldiered on in their "confirmed" rank without the related insignia and pay. This might be the kind of issue a union could sort out.
I was recently Acting in a higher rank position. No extra pay or anything. I just got to continue doing my normal job AND the Acting one as well. It’s fun!!I guess it depends on what positions we are talking about. It may be that the CAF has high rank-low rank positions. So a Sgt/MCpl could still be a section commander or platoon warrant could be a Sgt/WO.
But doesn’t WSE or Acting/lacking already cover some of that?
Queen’s Regulations officially permits military personnel to join civilian trade unions and professional associations, that enhance their trade skills and knowledge1; but the UK’s trade union legislation specifically excludes armed forces personnel from collective labour relations2. This prevents the statutory creation of an association to represent and promote the interests of the UK’s armed forces, making the UK out-of-step with many of our closest allies. The militaries of Germany, Norway, the USA, Belgium, Australia, Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Ireland all benefit from armed forces representative bodies.
1. DFWA was formed as the Regular Defence Force Welfare Association in 1958 at the urging of federal parliamentarians as there was no organisation representing the interests of serving ADF members and their families to government. At that time, the standing Army had recently been created and legislation changes concerning superannuation pensions, affecting serving members and obviously affecting them after service, were being introduced. There was no organisation addressing the welfare of those leaving the regular forces or protecting the conditions of service of those serving. At that time, existing exservice organisations (ESO) such as the RSL were concerned with “returned” servicemen and Legacy was concerned only with the widows and dependents of those who did not return.
2. Ministerial approval was given to form the Association and the word “welfare” in the title was crucial for that decision. The term “Regular” was dropped from the name in 2007, in recognition of the changed circumstances in which regular full time and reserve members of the ADF now serve.
3. Our Purpose. The DFWA purpose is to support the interests and wellbeing of both serving and exserving members of the ADF and their families. We have official ADF and Defence recognition for this role.
a. We are an Authorised Intervener at Defence Force Remuneration Tribunal on Pay and Conditions of Service hearings. For example, we represent the interests of currently serving ADF members, especially on the Workplace Remuneration Arrangement hearings every three years.
b. We are the official ADF Member representative on the national Emergency Services Industry Reference Committee managing recognition of training across the industry. Other members are emergency service unions and emergency services employer and the Defence employer representatives.
How often do we use those tools?I guess it depends on what positions we are talking about. It may be that the CAF has high rank-low rank positions. So a Sgt/MCpl could still be a section commander or platoon warrant could be a Sgt/WO.
But doesn’t WSE or Acting/lacking already cover some of that?
Sure. It’s a leadership issue and the will to do up the proper paperwork.How often do we use those tools?
If unionized it would be part of the contract, not left up to the CoC to determine if it's worth their time/effort.
Mine are 1.75% of salary, but we also saw some pretty rapid and significant compensation increases. Phenomenal return on investment. It also includes representation and if necessary legal counsel for disciplinary proceedings, or for statutory charges if it’s in the course of duty and not covered by the crown. Lots of other stuff too. Well worth it
Sure. It’s a leadership issue and the will to do up the proper paperwork.
We do work a lot one rank above though. A Capt could be a company commander right? Does this mean he gets Major pay and the rank to go with that if he’s a Company Commander on a 30 day ex?
We would have to abandon certain practices. An infantry section commander would have to be a Sgt for example and never a MCpl. 2ic take over would still be a thing but would come with an acting promotion and rank.
Not arguing for or against. But my suspicion is we would have way more people in acting ranks than in substantive ones in our military.