Allowances - Post Living Differential (PLD) [MERGED]

[PPCLI Guy]

I’m pretty sure they don’t get into fights at Brigade smokers either….

At least that incident wasn't briefed at CDS Ops the following day.

Oh wait...

 

[markppcli]

At least that incident wasn't briefed at CDS Ops the following day.

Oh wait...

If nothing else it made MR 2013 memorable. Nothing like a good brawl to cap off an ex.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

If nothing else it made MR 2013 memorable. Nothing like a good brawl to cap off an ex.

Some off us grew up with the CAF version of this:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=2288561864803853

 

[Infanteer]

In policy or in actuality? The differences are very very stark in Shilo. Junior Officers quarters have essentially a suite with living rooms, bed room, and a bathroom. Meanwhile a new MCpl we have posted in has to walk the other end of the hall to use the washroom. The SNCO single living in isn’t much better. Why is there three standards of accommodation all based on rank? The temporary accommodation in Gagetown is 100 percent separated by rank with Cpls, even PLQ qualified and instructing, house 4 to a room with Sgt and Up get hotel rooms in D60.

When were these buildings constructed? Is this a conscious policy, or an inheritance of an old way of business?

 

[markppcli]

When were these buildings constructed? Is this a conscious policy, or an inheritance of an old way of business?

Which ones ?

In Gagetown it’s a base accommodations policy. Or was when I was teaching there in 2021. Augmented staff got D59/60 if Sgt or up, D27 (two to a room two rooms share a toilet + shower) for MCpl, Cpls got D24 which is newer but four to a room bathroom down the hall. All of us doing the same job.

In Shilo, I have no idea when the officers shacks were built but the “Gunners shacks” are approximately 10 years old, the language school which also has accommodations for posted in folks is around the same.

 

[Infanteer]

Not to speculate on specific base policies or what informed accommodation construction, but I could see this being something conceived completely free of "Officer/NCM divide" - what you describe for junior ranks accommodations is exactly what I saw offered to new university students on campus.

I venture this both enables the efficient housing of a large group of individuals (junior troops/new university students) but also a way to keep rental costs low for a group that has lower income. As a senior student, upgraded housing (like what you described for NCOs) was available and, if one didn't like any of it, one could move off the base and pay for something that suited their tastes. Maybe those dastardly officers who built the shacks were just applying a commonly accepted solution?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

That actually is already a thing. If your on MELs that preclude you from going to the field you lose LDA. Enforcement of the policy is command dependent. I’ve conducted… I guess you could look at it like an audit of guys in Mel’s to see if they’d hit the 1 CMBG limit.

1 CMBG limit? The CBIs already detail no entitlement conditions. Why would 1 CBMG have their own unique rules?

 

[Halifax Tar]

Meanwhile, across the harbour in Stadacona, the standard is markedly higher in both Juno and Tribute Towers (assuming there is actually water and functioning HVAC in both, but I digress…)

Nit picking here but for decades Warrior Block was the prize barracks in the area for JRs. Its only since we tore down A Block, Normandy Block and the Mods and built Tribute Tower that things have changed.

Not to mention the old C&POs mess ashore was atrocious and completely infested with vermin and insects.

The RCN has come a ways in Halifax in a reasonable time. But it certainly wasn't always this way.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Not to speculate on specific base policies or what informed accommodation construction, but I could see this being something conceived completely free of "Officer/NCM divide" - what you describe for junior ranks accommodations is exactly what I saw offered to new university students on campus.

I venture this both enables the efficient housing of a large group of individuals (junior troops/new university students) but also a way to keep rental costs low for a group that has lower income. As a senior student, upgraded housing (like what you described for NCOs) was available and, if one didn't like any of it, one could move off the base and pay for something that suited their tastes. Maybe those dastardly officers who built the shacks were just applying a commonly accepted solution?

Are you truly stating that its right to house people in better conditions because of rank and hiding behind pay rates to justify it ?

If its efficient and cost effective to put four to a room with a small closet then do the same for all ranks.

 

[dapaterson]

Not to mention the old C&POs mess ashore was atrocious and completely infested with vermin and insects.

 

[markppcli]

Not to speculate on specific base policies or what informed accommodation construction, but I could see this being something conceived completely free of "Officer/NCM divide" - what you describe for junior ranks accommodations is exactly what I saw offered to new university students on campus.

I venture this both enables the efficient housing of a large group of individuals (junior troops/new university students) but also a way to keep rental costs low for a group that has lower income. As a senior student, upgraded housing (like what you described for NCOs) was available and, if one didn't like any of it, one could move off the base and pay for something that suited their tastes. Maybe those dastardly officers who built the shacks were just applying a commonly accepted solution?

Did those university students get moved into dorms when they were ordered to move from one end of the country to the other at the age of 30? Step back, look at this objectively, no one called officers dastardly and I’ve been very clear I understand a degree of separation.

Universities are in the business of making money off their students, surely we have different goals in housing soldiers whom we are hoping will have careers longer than four years.

Edit: the question that was asked by @Fabius was why there was a perception of a cultural difference between officers and NCM / NCOs. I’m simply pointing out the most obvious example, accommodations. I could equally point to the requirement for duty NCOs and Cpls to spend 30 odd hours in a building while the Duty officer carry’s a cell phone.

 

[markppcli]

1 CMBG limit? The CBIs already detail no entitlement conditions. Why would 1 CBMG have their own unique rules?

is the CBI 6 months? What defines 6 months without going to the field? Is that 6 months of Mel’s limiting you, does it have to be concurrent? What if there was no opportunity? Ect ect. I said 1 CMBG because that’s were the directive came from. Obviously the policy is CAF wide.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Years ago, a civilian buddy of mine who had a pretty long career in the private sector said something that still resounds with me:

“In the private sector, your boss is pretty much allowed to be an ass to you. You can complain, but you best be looking at another line of work.”

Pretty much. I've seen people be way more prickish here than I ever saw in the CAF. I also know and have met some senior execs that are certifiable assholes.

Are you truly stating that its right to house people in better conditions because of rank and hiding behind pay rates to justify it ?

If its efficient and cost effective to put four to a room with a small closet then do the same for all ranks.

Yes there is a form of class system in the CAF and yes commissioned officers get better quarters and accommodations than the rank and file.

But....

It's also a Volunteer Military and everyone is free to try and become an Officer if they want so it's not like the old days when Commissions were bought and paid for.

Want to live in the nice shacks, put the hand up, undergo the selection process, do the training and coursing and you too can enjoy the fruits of your labour!

We generally have equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.


As I said, management gets perks everywhere. I get numerous perks in my current line of work that my Unionized Employees don't get access to. Now they do have pretty nice bunkhouses and travel accommodations themselves but that's all been negotiated as part of their CBA. If we could spend less money we would but we adhere to the CBA.

I also work a lot more and am on call whereas my Unionized employees aren't subjected to those conditions and when they are off the clock, their time is there's and they cannot be disturbed, so there is a tradeoff.

The issue with accommodations in the CAF is that the organization has systemically underfunded infrastructure investments for decades and allowed most base accommodations to fall in to a state of disrepair. The rank and file also have no ability to collective bargain so it will remain so until that changes.

But.... the current conditions are definitely one of many factors that impact recruitment. The conditions of our bases is something that is also noted by Joe Canadian as well. I recently had my Wedding at the Vimy Officer's Mess in Kingston and my Father noted the condition of the base as we drove on to the property the day before the ceremony:

"Wow, I can't believe they’ve let the buildings and base infrastructure decay to this point" were the exact words that came out of his mouth.

He was also shocked that there was no security of any form whatsoever to gain entry on to the base.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

is the CBI 6 months? What defines 6 months without going to the field? Is that 6 months of Mel’s limiting you, does it have to be concurrent? What if there was no opportunity? Ect ect. I said 1 CMBG because that’s were the directive came from. Obviously the policy is CAF wide.

The CBI lays out the details fairly well; Chapter 205- Allowances for officers and non-commissioned members - Canada.ca

 

[Fabius]

In Gagetown it’s a base accommodations policy. Or was when I was teaching there in 2021. Augmented staff got D59/60 if Sgt or up, D27 (two to a room two rooms share a toilet + shower) for MCpl, Cpls got D24 which is newer but four to a room bathroom down the hall. All of us doing the same job.

There is a difference here but it’s between NCM ranks as well so it’s not necessarily an officer vs NCM thing but a function of a hierarchy from top to bottom.
Driven also by a limited supply of rooms of various types, not saying it’s right or wrong but you have to allocate limited supply in some fashion. The CA and military in general does use rank to do that in some cases.

 

[Fabius]

The CBI lays out the details fairly well; Chapter 205- Allowances for officers and non-commissioned members - Canada.ca

Under the disentitlement specifications 205.15(a) the biggest question a CoC has is how do you prove a member has refused field duty etc.

As an example a member who is not on PCAT or TCAT but who gets 30 days unfit field MEL 4 days before the last 3 exercises over 9 months?

1 CMBG to my understanding has just gone to fully enforcing the ceasing of LDA for PCAT and 181 plus day TCAT while also supporting COs in exercising some deliberate review board type determinations on items such as my example.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

As an example a member who is not on PCAT or TCAT but who gets 30 days unfit field MEL 4 days before the last 3 exercises over 9 months?

1 CMBG to my understanding has just gone to fully enforcing the ceasing of LDA for PCAT and 181 plus day TCAT while also supporting COs in exercising some deliberate review board type determinations on items such as my example.

If that example fits the CBI, then the action should be as per the CBI.

No one except the mbr and clinician knows to should know what condition(s) warrant MELs. Does it seem fishy? Who cares? COs can discuss with the B Surg etc but I don’t see where they have authority to disallow the allowance if it doesn’t match policy such as CBI.

These little unit “review boards” are challenging the Health Services authority more than the mbr. The BSurg should be addressing that appropriately.

 

[Infanteer]

Are you truly stating that its right to house people in better conditions because of rank and hiding behind pay rates to justify it ?

If its efficient and cost effective to put four to a room with a small closet then do the same for all ranks.

No, but I am stating that offering affordable accommodations with shared washrooms and, possibly, shared living space is not unusual nor unique to the military.

I was just talking to a soldier who lives in the shacks. He says he doesn't mind it (it was his first time away from home) and that he and a friend are looking to move out into either a PMQ or rent something on the civilian market.

I'm really not seeing the issue here - the soldier has choices.

Did those university students get moved into dorms when they were ordered to move from one end of the country to the other at the age of 30? Step back, look at this objectively, no one called officers dastardly and I’ve been very clear I understand a degree of separation.

Universities are in the business of making money off their students, surely we have different goals in housing soldiers whom we are hoping will have careers longer than four years.
Edit: the question that was asked by @Fabius was why there was a perception of a cultural difference between officers and NCM / NCOs. I’m simply pointing out the most obvious example, accommodations. I could equally point to the requirement for duty NCOs and Cpls to spend 30 odd hours in a building while the Duty officer carry’s a cell phone.

Different duty requirements - the Duty NCO and Cpl are required to be on hand to ensure security and 24 hour access of the facility, the Duty Officer isn't. The Duty Officer is expected to answer the phone at 0200 and head downtown as a liaison to pick up the soldier who got punched out in a bar and is being hospitalized with injuries.

I know you are not being disingenuous here. I'm just trying to point out that there are in many cases bona fide reasons why there is a difference in employment between the two as opposed to it simply being a case of a preferential treatment towards a commission. In many of these cases, as @Humphrey Bogart alluded to, it is simply normal Western hierarchical manager/worker split (WOs on the unit duty roster either) and is not unique to the military. In other cases it is a lack of investment in resources. FWIW, I've shared a bunk bed in the shacks with a Colonel (who snored loud!) because that is what was available - the corporal and CWO were across from us. The Army is actually better than a lot of other fields and occupations in sharing the conditions of employment.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Pretty much. I've seen people be way more prickish here than I ever saw in the CAF. I also know and have met some senior execs that are certifiable assholes.



Yes there is a form of class system in the CAF and yes commissioned officers get better quarters and accommodations than the rank and file.

But....

It's also a Volunteer Military and everyone is free to try and become an Officer if they want so it's not like the old days when Commissions were bought and paid for.

Want to live in the nice shacks, put the hand up, undergo the selection process, do the training and coursing and you too can enjoy the fruits of your labour!

We generally have equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.


As I said, management gets perks everywhere. I get numerous perks in my current line of work that my Unionized Employees don't get access to. Now they do have pretty nice bunkhouses and travel accommodations themselves but that's all been negotiated as part of their CBA. If we could spend less money we would but we adhere to the CBA.

I also work a lot more and am on call whereas my Unionized employees aren't subjected to those conditions and when they are off the clock, their time is there's and they cannot be disturbed, so there is a tradeoff.

The issue with accommodations in the CAF is that the organization has systemically underfunded infrastructure investments for decades and allowed most base accommodations to fall in to a state of disrepair. The rank and file also have no ability to collective bargain so it will remain so until that changes.

But.... the current conditions are definitely one of many factors that impact recruitment. The conditions of our bases is something that is also noted by Joe Canadian as well. I recently had my Wedding at the Vimy Officer's Mess in Kingston and my Father noted the condition of the base as we drove on to the property the day before the ceremony:

"Wow, I can't believe they’ve let the buildings and base infrastructure decay to this point" were the exact words that came out of his mouth.

He was also shocked that there was no security of any form whatsoever to gain entry on to the base.

I don't think people have an issue with the class (Rank) system, I think its the perceived or real lack of representation and care for welfare of the lower class (Ranks), i.e. the JRs.

Understood, decades of ignoring our infrastructure and equipment problems are coming to head, but sharing the adversity of your people will go a long way to letting them know we are all in this together vice the us VS them feeling that seems to be growing.

 

[Halifax Tar]

No, but I am stating that offering affordable accommodations with shared washrooms and, possibly, shared living space is not unusual nor unique to the military.

I was just talking to a soldier who lives in the shacks. He says he doesn't mind it (it was his first time away from home) and that he and a friend are looking to move out into either a PMQ or rent something on the civilian market.

I'm really not seeing the issue here - the soldier has choices.

Fair. I will suck back and reload. Thank you for the clarification.