babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Layton pledges money for military and RCMP veterans
April 3, 2011 - 10:37pm
Playing to his base? 
The NDP is a pro-military party, there is no surprise that this plan is coming out as official policy. I just assume this plan would come out later in the campaign.
While there is valid criticism of the military and police institutions in Canada, I see nothing wrong with giving them decent pensions and government benefits, especially considering how well documented mental health issues are among veterans.
Besides, remember that despite the massive military spending in the US, veterans health services there are underfunded, to the point that a good chunk of homeless people in the US are military veterans.
It's a bit more honest than the party which claims to support their troops, and then tries to get off paying soldiers $150,000 for a lost limb and assuming that is the end of it.
Like it or not, this is a long-term problem that is going to ahve to get paid for one way or another. The problem is pretending that it is not one of the consequences and costs of war.
Um:
1. Nonsense. Among other things, it will stop the carve-out of pension from LTD benefits (a universal LTD insurance principle), thereby allowing double-dipping. This is a benefit which no unionized workers I am aware of enjoy.
2. This is the purest pandering on the part of Layton. "Support our troops and cops"? Why is that? How about promising to improve benefits and minimum standards in the Canada Labour Code? How about returning to the charge on anti-scab legislation (which was kyboshed by Stéphane Dion)?
This is a simple statement: "Nova Scotians are all military-minded warmongers, so I'll buy some votes here."
Trouble is, Harper outdid him by buying the premier. One step ahead.
This is actually disgusting.
Troops and cops work for the gov't but get much fewer benefits than public servants. This is partial redress. Playing to the base? Hardly. Standing up for fairness? Arguably.
Maybe he could say: "Why have two consecutive Liberal and Conservative governments sent our soldiers to be mutilated and killed, and to mutilate and kill the Afghan people? We see these people not as heroes, but as victims - and we will fulfill our responsibility to look after them, something the heartless ones who sent them as cannon fodder are not even capable of doing."
But he'll never say that, because he doesn't give a shit about these poor veterans (does he???) - he's trawling for votes and proving he's not Taliban Jack.
Disgusting.
ETA: If he actually cares about their supposedly inferior benefits, he should publicly support the RCMP in their fight for the right to unionize and bargain collectively.
@Anyonymouse-- Wrong. Not to mention that an RCMPig will be making $77,944 after 36 short months of harrasing poor people. There is not another job in frontline public work that would pay that much after three years.
What professions are you considering as front line public workers?
The disgusting electoral system made him do it.
And it does appear as though Steve Harper's bosses in Warshington are being advised to negotiate along the lines of Taliban Jack Layton's advice. Jack is just one step ahead of our stooges and Washington and London is all. Afghanistan is just one of those issues that doesn't really concern our colonial administrativeship in Ottawa - our two old line parties don't make these executive kinds of decisions anyway.
"Professions"? Killing people? Wanna rephrase that?
Sorry, I am not sure what you mean?
I ask what professions does Le T consider as "front line public workers".
It was his term not mine, however I believe he means nurses, IT/IS specialists, marine operators, etc, etc.
Ok, Todrick, where did Le T use the word "professions"? I must have missed it. Or do you think "front line public workers" are professionals - like our fine soldiers and cops? Are you using the word "profession" in some non-English sense that you could decode for us?
Unionist, I did not say Le T used the "professions".
I only wanted to know what professions/occupations/jobs/ does he consider as a "front linen public worker"
What is your definition of "profession"?
Lawyer, physician, architect, engineer... Why don't you check out any labour code:
Doesn't include labourers or counter agents or customer service employees or secretaries or even skilled trades (electrician, pipefitter, machinist, etc.) which require four (4) or more years of classroom and on-job instruction.
And you want to compare soldiers and mounties to "professionals"? What a laugh.
And before you disagree with Le T, why not look up a few of the pay scales of the people I mentioned in the federal public service, and tell me how much they are paid after 36 months. Or would you like me to do so?
What exactly are you trying to prove, anyway? That the NDP should be looking after cops and soldiers better than the Conservatives do? I disagree. I think they should be laying off most of them, with of course decent layoff or departure benefits.
What is your problem? Where did I say or indicate that soldiers or Mounties or any number of number of government employees are professionals?
I am quiet familiar with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat and government employee pay rates.
I am not trying to prove anything, I just asked a simple question to Le T. I only wanted to know what he meant in post #7.
You seem to have some sort of issue with the question.
@Unionst:
As a retired Canadian Regular Force Naval officer of 20 plus years, and a card-carrying, longtime New Dem, who has always only voted New Dem, I am not at all suprised by Jack's annoucement. In fact through Peter Stoffer, Jack Harris, and a long time, Davey Orlikow, the NDP has always been a strong voice for Canada's military, especially regarding the treatment of veterans. This isn't "playing to his base". This is simply a reafirmation of something that has always been the NDP's position. I don't get where your animus comes from. Brave Jack, well done! And frankly, thank-you.
Arthur Cramer, Lt(N) CD, Ret'd, Winnipeg
Then you'll know that a Typist gets $35,847 after 36 months.
A Stenographer gets $35,125 after 36 months.
A Secretary, depending on level, gets between $34442 and a maximum of $49250 (which is the top-level supervisory position) after 36 months.
You mentioned "marine operations"? A Coast Guard marine communications and traffic service officer gets $53,580 after 36 months.
You want to compare a soldier or a mountie to a nurse? or an IT specialist? I don't think so. That's an awfully confused kind of comparison, in labour market terms.
Layton's plan would provide them with benefits which no Treasury Board employee enjoys (such as, no carve-out of pension on LTD). These are gratuitous and pandering proposals, quite deliberately delivered in Nova Scotia.
You may want to look at CPAC this evening and watch Mr. Layton talk to a group of veterans, who applaud him after he expresses (again) condolences on the death of Corporal Yannick Sherrer in Afghanistan last week. Mr. Layton forgets to mention that the NDP demands that all troops get out this year.
It wouldn't play well with his base. Not at that moment or place, in any event.
Actually, a ST-STN-1 earns $35,125 after 48 months.
Again where did I say I want to compare one occupation to another?
As I said earlier, the NDP is a pro-military party and has been for the last decade, just go back review their policies for the last 4 elections.
Um, no, Todrick. $35,125 is Step 4 on the pay scale, which means that it takes effect on the third anniversary date of hire into that classification and level, and is bumped upward to $35,925 on the fourth anniversary - that is, it's $35,125 between 36 and 48 months after hire. Not a big error, but just thought I'd correct it anyway.
When you challenged Le T, who said:
I was just citing some figures to prove Le T is correct.
As for the NDP being a pro-military party, I don't know what you mean by that. I know Peter Stoffer publicly broke ranks in 2006 when Layton called for withdrawal of troops. But I think of the NDP as being composed of its members, not some tyrannical elite that cynically makes up whatever momentary campaign slogan which the spin doctors recommend.
And even if one supports the troops, that's no excuse to pledge exaggerated benefits to retired soldiers and mounties. For what? Being better than workers? I don't think so!
Anyway, go watch Layton on CPAC at his Dartmouth veterans' rally, if you want a lesson in pandering.
What about Dawn Black, Pat Martin, Jack Layton and Gary Doer? They have all said a lot of pro-military statements over the years.
The NDP have continue to call upon on the imperialistic UN to do the dirty work of western countries and organizations as witness for the call to bomb Libya over the last few weeks.
I am sorry if you think I was challenging Le T, I thought it was a simple question. It was not my intention to cause so much discord and grief?
And I am mistake about the Step 3 and 4 on the wages.
Pro-aggression, pro-U.S., pro-NATO - yes, though Jack Layton not so bad as the other three. To his credit, he has often listened to the rank and file rather than to these particular warmongers, though the distinction has been difficult to draw at some crucial moments, unfortunately.
I'm aware of that. But being "pro-military" would mean to support the troops and bring them home from unjust, murderous, and suicidal missions. If Canada used its armed forces for peace and justice, and only fought those enemies that want to commit aggression against us, deaths and injuries would be down to negligible numbers.
He was pointing to the obscene rewards given to the RCMP, and the greater obscenity of Jack Layton stumping for them. Who the hell does Layton think he's going to win over with such appeals? In that sense, Le T's basic point was utterly valid, and didn't need a sidebar about whether there are other "frontline" public servants who earn $77000 after 3 years.
As I said, it's not a problem. Treasury Board pay scales are built to confuse honest people, so honest mistakes are understandable.
I'm glad that Layton came out with this. NDP is about fairness to those who labour, and soldiers and police labour. This is not pro-military or police but about common decendency!
He might have started with those in need. Like the countless disabled workers in this country, of all walks of life, who have no long-term disability salary replacement benefits of any kind, let alone the type applicable to the forces and RCMP. All most workers get is 15 weeks of EI sick benefits (max about $468 per week) - not (say) 70% of their income for decades of disability. I haven't heard him raise that issue at all for those who "labour". And why didn't he speak of the NDP convention plan to reduce maimings and deaths of soldiers, by an "immediate and safe withdrawal" of all troops from Afghanistan?
As for the plan announced by Layton, I still need an explanation of why soldiers and mounties should be allowed to collect both disability benefits and pension benefits, when every single LTD plan I have ever seen provides for a carve-out of pension from disability... otherwise you'd have people earning more while on disability than those at work.
What are we rewarding them for? Putting their lives at risk in unjust wars? Accidentally stepping between a fellow mountie's taser and an Aboriginal victim? How about Layton demanding a "no carve-out" clause for all Canadian workers? Too expensive? Didn't think about it? No votes in it?
Why are soldiers or police more worthy of "help" from the "country that broke them" than the many, many more people who work for a living and get few or no benefits, work in incredibly unsafe jobs and have no pensions? What about all those "temporary workers" that produce massive amounts of food (and wealth) that don't even get access to basic civil or human rights?
Soldiers are not anymore "heroic" than labourers and in most cases they enjoy a safer workplace with better benefits. As has been stated, if we really wanted to improve the working conditions of soldiers we would stop sending them into imperial battles and get them real jobs that don't involve killing poor, racialized people so that a couple guys downtown can make a billion dollars.
Last week i was at the Raise the Rates rally against cuts to the Special Diet in Ontario. I thought about how the many cops who joined us to make sure that we didn't interfere with business as usual were all getting paid between 80k and 100k per year. Welfare in Ontario is $598 per month.
Fuck the police and fuck Layton and all the NDPers who are more interested in getting the military/cop vote and pandering to "hard working middle-class families" than justice.
What is going on here is what is called horizontal violence; you attack your peers and are distracted from the real issues.
In this case, basic fairness. Everyone here on this forum should be in favor of that.
There are other issues that have been raised, and yes those need addressal. But the fact that Jack did the right thing today should be cheered. I agree, especially as a retired military officer that we shouldn't be in Afgahanistan or Libya, or engaged in military adventurism. But those are different issues. You don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
So let me get this straight, every thread through this campaign will be an NDP bashing session for not throwing out huge lies that they couldn't possibly fulfill, and bashing them on pretty much any issue that some people have a pet peave about. Good to know I post on such a progressive site that want only to point out NDP flaws if someone wanted to understand their position. You do the party proud people.
Seriously I see more criticism of the NDP(no matter what position they take on any given issue) on this site than the MSM does, or that of any other party in this election.
Ever wonder what happen to a lot of the regulars that use to contribute here...yeah.
Barking up the wrong tree.
Its not just pandering for votes. The NDP itself is full of military-minded warmongerers.
I think its a great gesture to people that deserve it.
And I think that other people deserve the help more does not change that.
If you dont like the gensture, you can dislike the NDP more than you already do. [Big change.] And if you are in or close to the NDP, and you dont like it, you can decide what this means to your support.
It is playing to a bigger part of the base than the part where you are 'located.'
ETA: Which is not saying/implying that the part of the base where you are located does not matter.
It is calling attention to your presumption about who the base is.