Gen. John Vance gets a raise — Trudeau recommends increase to upper limit of $306,500 | National Post
nationalpost.com/news/national/defence-watch/...
nationalpost.comPosted May 21, 2019, 5:38 PM UTC
111121
nationalpost.com[deleted]
64
I am also okay with the defacto CEO making a decent pay cheque, that's only fair for the reasons you point out.
The comments are coming from the timing of this announcements WRT the whole Norman Fiasco
37
I don’t think people are getting upset by the amount. It’s more the timing - seems like a payoff for keeping his mouth shut and playing ball about the fiasco with Norman.
23
[deleted]
3
You are right, people are complaining about both.
1
With an organization so wrapped up in optics like ours are we communicating that we’re not that good at it?
2
Rightfully so, the CEO of any corporation employing 100,000 people makes many times more money.
While I agree that the CDS has similar, or greater responsibilities than that CEO, I disagree that it means the CDS should be getting paid millions a year, as I think CEOs are massively over paid, but that's another topic.
10
[deleted]
11
With all due respect, I believe your take on this to be one of denial. The forces is alot of people's identify, and to try and come to terms with the corruption blatantly in front of you can be hard to do.
I had a career of making excuses for leaderships decisions and ultimately I faced the reality that there is no justification for some of the actions.
This is one of those cases. Blatant hush money.
Don't try and fool yourself (for your own sanity) with anything else.
Like I said, that is just my opinion and i don't know how young, old, new, crusty you are.
3†
Eh. Maybe? Could have waited a couple more months to do it if they didn't want to get called out on it. Plus, there have been similar raises in the past. Approximately a 1% raise per year. Even less than since it was a 1.1% raise from 2015 to 2017. Literally less than inflation.
4
There gets to a point where compensation just is ridiculous.
And it just keeps the rich getting richer off the backs of those who lifted them there.
-2†
[deleted]
14
I'm not talking about his 300k, I'm talking about the CEOs that were touted as an example.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/8/16/17693198/ceo-pay-gap-income-inequality
Since when is someone worth 300x what the salary of those who actually make the company work are worth?
4
Depends on whether you ask the board, the shareholders, the employees, or perform a cost/benefit analysis.
1
I think he means he wants a pay raise as well.
3
No, I want to eat the rich, and abolish the poor.
6
He’s not in the civilian world though. If he wanted to be the CEO of a major corporation he should stayed on civvie street. The fact is, he is part of the public service, no matter what his duties and responsibilities are.
3
You are right and people forget that he his liable for around 60k members. He has a lot on his shoulders. In the corporate world this is peanuts for all of his responsibilities.
1
[removed]
-5†
[removed]
4
[removed]
-1†
[removed]
13
Your post/comment has been removed in accordance with the following subreddit rule:
[1] Disrespectful/Rude/Insulting Comments/Reddiquette
- Courtesy, politeness, and civility are expected within this subreddit. A post or comment may be removed if it's considered in violation of Reddit's RULES, Reddiquette, and User Agreement. Repeat offences may result in the offending user banned from the subreddit.
- Trolling is defined as "a deliberately offensive or inciteful online post with the aim of upsetting or eliciting an angry response." Trolling the troll, can also be considered trolling.
If your have questions or concerns relating to this message you've received, please feel free to Contact the Moderators.
1
I kinda see where you're coming from..but I don't agree.
FWIW it's a lot less impactful (read as: your employess die) when you fuck up as the CEO and lose 5% profit. If the CDS makes a mistake, people could die. He's responsible for hundreds if not thousands of people 24/7, around the globe, some of them participating in risky business. One mis-step could equal some troops not coming home.
Risk has many shapes but I don't for a second think that a CEO of a company assumes more risk than the CDS of a first world armed forces.
3
I see your point, but the CDS is so far removed from the conflict that he's barely liable for a death. Hillier didn't wear any of that on his career when we lost friends overseas and he's still the apparent shining example of modern CDSs despite actual Combat losses in his tenure. Henault was in during the whole 'lets send Iltis's to an IED infested rat hole' and nary a finger was pointed at him. Nor Natynczyk after he took over from Hillier.
A CEO has little loss risk, but I still believe there's a sharp contrast between the two that bears little merit for an equalization of wages. Just having lots of people to your name and sending them on missions isn't enough to warrant such a thing. If thats the case, the PM is reposnsible for 33+ million. He wears the risk of death of either soldiers or other public servants more than anyone in his office, CDS or otherwise. Paul Martin and Harper got raked for any of our deaths, never the CDS.
3
Valid points.
1
Their companies can also fail and cease to exist.
I would counter that we are not completely exempt from this possibility.
2
And I would counter with the fact that companies are always "at war" in that they're always doing business. The caf isn't remotely close to being wiped out... Like ever.
1
Risk eh?
Company fails = low level employee is laid off;
Company fails = CEO given golden parachute.
1
[removed]
1
Your post/comment has been removed in accordance with the following subreddit rule:
[1] Disrespectful/Rude/Insulting Comments/Reddiquette
- Courtesy, politeness, and civility are expected within this subreddit. A post or comment may be removed if it's considered in violation of Reddit's RULES, Reddiquette, and User Agreement. Repeat offences may result in the offending user banned from the subreddit.
- Trolling is defined as "a deliberately offensive or inciteful online post with the aim of upsetting or eliciting an angry response." Trolling the troll, can also be considered trolling.
If your have questions or concerns relating to this message you've received, please feel free to Contact the Moderators.
1
Well, that's nice.
I guess we can assume he'll get a nice fat check for all the retroactive pay.
56
That is the price of falling on your sword, perhaps?
55
That is the price of falling on your sword, perhaps?
Falling on his sword? He's barely cut his thumb with his Gerber.
52
Lol
3
What about our raises?
53
Next time you throw the VCDS under the bus, ask for one.
64
Could a few privates work instead?
32
Here's your leaf.
19
sobs in no hook
11
I’m wondering if this is a hint that we can expect a raise again soon...
7
Too early. Our last was in 2017, and they've been coming every four years or so.
7
They're linked to the public service. So we'll get our next update after the next collective agreement. Don't expect anything before 2021.
3
For clarity: The actual wage he negotiates and is now in the range of $260600 – $306500. The actual agreed upon wage is protected under the privacy act, as are any benefits on top of the wage (Duty Pay/benefits for example).
It was previously $247900 to $291600, back to June 2017. Previous to that (2015) it was between $219100-$257700.
40
Damn so up to nearly 100k raise in 4 years. Not bad.
36
To be fair, if he was CoO/CEO & running a public company of 65k-100k people nation wide he'd be making a fuck of a lot more.
Also though, he's public service, and making in range of what the PM does (340k), with a lot less perks than him.
52
Oh ya as someone pointed out above I think it is commensurate with his duties and I have no issue with it. We won't attract the best if we don't pay competitively
29
We won't attract the best if we don't pay competitively
Doesn't appear to be an issue
11
Public companies need to pay their CEOs 100s of thousands of dollars in order to attract top caliber talent into that type of position.
The CF is never going to be in a position where they will be trying to attract former CEOs to be the CDS, so that argument doesn’t fly.
The question all Canadians should be asking when anyone is making that much money on our dime, is what is the quality of work we are receiving in return? Given the comments here and elsewhere, it looks like there is a strong feeling that we are already overpaying him drastically. So if the Canadian public is receiving very limited value for the dollars being spent, who is it, aside from the CDS himself, who is benefitting from this?
3
[removed]
4
The question all Canadians should be asking when anyone is making that much money on our dime, is what is the quality of work we are receiving in return? Given the comments here and elsewhere, it looks like there is a strong feeling that we are already overpaying him drastically.
TIL: Reddit comments are indicative of general Canadian public opinion.
3
Public companies need to pay their CEOs 100s of thousands of dollars in order to attract top caliber talent into that type of position.
Whaaaaaaaaaat???!!! You are so far off base with that comment.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/ceo-income-pay-canadian-worker-1.4462496
Canada's top CEOs earn 200 times an average worker's salary Nothing justifies a CEO to make that much more than employees.
3
Admittedly, there's 1 of him and 70,000 CAF members so his paycheck isn't unreasonable. Although, the paycheck I believe isn't the key point of this post, the key point is the bloody timing.
2
Sure but they are also competent and have vastly more experience.
1
Where'd that public service pay chart go?
2
Can we get a LOG to convert this into sleeping bags/year or rucksacks/year?
23
Right now its 1 ruck per 25years with risk of loss if exchanged for a new one
8
Alrighty. Now I’m really starting to get pissed.
16
Why are you getting pissed? There are so many things but what specifically in this case?
13
The timing on this couldn't be worse haha
14
Well we asked for a pay raise. There it is.
Government just took the "a" a little literally.
6
This kind of shit makes me want to release.
6
So any officers in the crowd know what that works out to in terms of pension?
5
Pensions are the same for NCM and officers, 2 percent per year of service of the average of your best five years, up to a max of 70 percent. Officer pensions are only higher because it is based on salary.
So in theory his pension could be as high as 214k a year, though it will likely be closer to 180k.
20
Well, good work if you can get it I guess. Probably why Captains have 27 pay increments or whatever it is.
6
A lot of pay increments only means that it takes longer to get to the maximum salary for your rank. It's not a good thing.
3
Eh, I don't think it's that simple.
Captain Basic to Captain 10 is a 2122/mth difference.
To make that same difference as an NCM you need to go from Cpl basic to MWO 1.
An NCM needs to promote 4 times in order to get the same pay increase.
And that's increase, not pay. Captains still make more than MWO 1.
So it's not really fair to say it's bad that captains have 10 incentive levels because they're worth more than ncm incentive levels.
2
I think it's actually 10 incentive levels, but I get your point. I've always thought Cpl/LS should have the same as Cpl is the working rank for most NCM trades.
1
It's a little crazy that Captains have so many - should be just as many as a Cpl.
0
10 or 15 years ago I'd have agreed, not so much these days. Cpl is more of a pay incentive than a rank in may cases. The professional competent 20 year Cpls are getting a bit thin on the ground these days.
6
Summary: Between salary and added pension value the current compensation of all GOs likely falls between 450k/year and 650k/year. Assuming a 70% pension cap the total compensation of some 2 and 3 leafs could be more than the CDS' compensation. Numbers include no allowances or value for abuse of public resources for personal gain.
Each year of service gets him 2% of that year's salary from the time he retires until the time he dies. He is already at 35 years service though so I don't think his pension amount will increase beyond 70%.
His pension amount also averages up based on 5 best years of earnings. So if for every extra year of service he is knocking off a 220k year in favour of a 305k year then his average best 5 years is going up by 17k. At a 70% pension that is roughly 12k/year in added pension value. Since pensions are supposedly indexed we can get a close estimate of the added value in today's dollars of that pension as years of retirement * 12k. Or about 25 years * 12k/yr = 300k in added pension value.
Other GOs who have not reached the 35 years/70% pension mark would be receiving somewhat similar increases in pension value plus the 2%/year of service value. For a 3 star making 235k that additional year of service would be 2%235kyears of retirement. They also get averaged up for their best 5 years. So if they are cutting off 170k year as a 1 leaf they are averaging up at 9k/year in pension value. So a 30 year retirement might give a total equivalent pension increase of something like 2%22530 yrs + 9k(best 5 year increase)*30 yrs = 135k + 270k = 405k$ in today's dollars of added pension value for one year of service, plus base salary of 225k.
So essentially, when you factor in current pension values, all the GOs below 35 years of service are probably being compensated nearly as much or more than the CDS. But only considering salary + added pension values all GOs are being compensated between 450k-650k/year.
Of course there are allowances, PLD, all the travel claims (and points!!!), abuse of their staff to take care of personal business, use of government resources etc which can't easily be quantified. Also the pension values assume their pensions are capped similar to the rest of the Force's pension plans.
4
This guy pensions
4
It's my understanding that General Officers negotiate their pay, and essentially continue with the same amount after they retire.
3†
I should OT to General.
14
Here I am doing AOC like an idiot, turns out I should just be putting in my VOT to CLS!
5
I don't like to travel, maybe a nice liaison position in Brussels...
3
they are on the same pension plan as anyone else....so with 35 years of service the CDS will be making 70% of whatever his best 5 years were during retirement
8
Ive heard the negotiation thing before but I can't imagine it carries on at the same rate after retirement...
3
I heard that rumour too.
They actually get a pay band "negotiations within an upper and lower limit"
And their pension is the same rules as anyone elses under the superannuation act.
2
Assuming he carries that salary for 4-5 more years (which he won't, but for ease of calculation), with the fact he'll reach the cap of 70% of highest 5 years on the job...
214 550$ till the end of his life. I don't recall if you start to draw the whole thing when you're 60 or 65 though, and how much the bridge benefit compensates in case you draw your annuity early.
2
I'm not superstitious, but I am a little stitious.
4
Maybe to provoke a little competition from the contenders?
3
So... This isn't actually a lot considering his responsibilities...
This is comparable to a director in a mid-sized company. No where near CEO level...
More than I make. But less than someone who owns a dental practice...
3
Someone who owns a dental practice also has significant expenses and carries risk and does not automatically get benefits and a pension.
3
He's also a dentist and not the commander of a 100k person military
8
Not everything is measured in dollars and cents. Is the esteem of being a general not worth anything?
-3
Absolutely. Which is why he isn't making $1milion a year at Lockheed or Hamilton.
5
[deleted]
2
How about the esteem of just being in the military? Should we all take a pay cut just because we are looked up to by Joe Public? Or look at it another way - if a civilian employer offered you a salary triple your current one, would you stay in the Canadian Forces just because it's an esteemed and honourable profession?
The CDS position is subject to the same economic pressures as every other job. If you want someone competent in the CDS/CFCWO roles you need to offer a salary that's competitive enough to encourage our best and brightest to stay in the organization for the long haul.
1
Because Vance needs it. Along with the other 7 new positions for generals JT just created.
2
[deleted]
1
Not trying to buy friends at all.
0
Seems a little suspicious.
Seems a little too coincidental.
Seems a bit of a convenience for his troubles.
Seems like troubles for a bit of convenience
Seems real fucked
Seems a little too troubling for it to be a coincidence
Were I the suspicious type I'd theorize that perhaps the timing isn't coincidental for a different reason. The people currently in the PCO have proven themselves to be well versed in the Byzantine ways of the public service in Ottawa. This move certainly portrays Gen Vance as looking out for his own interests as opposed to those of the institution. With the failure of the case against Norman they are looking for a patsy to take the fall. This strikes me as being another aspect in that campaign. Follow the money to the authority and you'll see.
[deleted]
Byzantine, adjective - (of a system or situation) excessively complicated, and typically involving a great deal of administrative detail.