This is the same guy that claimed not getting a raise every year is taking a pay cut.
Civil servants share $6B 'severance' without losing jobs
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
This is the same guy that claimed not getting a raise every year is taking a pay cut.
I wonder if this payout is considered income (and taxed as such).
The irony would be sweet
Right.
I'm just stating that the short term premium will be huge, despite any possible long term benefit.
You guys would be willing to stomach a possible 30 year waiting period, and that's just not a good enough deal for taxpayers.
Last edited:
Of course it is. It's not Lotto 649 or bingo winnings.
Is everybody quitting and retiring today?
Sweet!
Hear that MF? The payout is fully taxable meaning that approximately 1/2 of the money gets returned to gvt right from the get-go.
Hell, Harper's program almost pays for itself!
When I retire and get my chunk from the Feds, I plan on hitting both the Legion bingo and the Kinsmen bingo every week. Dabbing is fun.
Can someone enlighten me and explain the rationale for paying people for NOT working! :lol: I know I did get something when I retired, but it certainly was nowhere near the obscene amounts that are common these days. :smile:
But not as often! :lol:
MF is correct in my opinion and in the opinion of most commentators. No evidence has been presented that there will be any savings in this and the budget will take a tremendous immediate hit.
However, that is not what interests me or concerns me. Why was this provision in the first place. It sounds like something that was negotiated in lieu of extra pay. If that is so, the government is acting illegally and breaching contracts. The question is not being asked and it needs to be.
It all sounds to me like one of Harper's PR stunts. Smoke and mirrors with a possible breach of contract thrown in.
However, that is not what interests me or concerns me. Why was this provision in the first place. It sounds like something that was negotiated in lieu of extra pay. If that is so, the government is acting illegally and breaching contracts. The question is not being asked and it needs to be.
It all sounds to me like one of Harper's PR stunts. Smoke and mirrors with a possible breach of contract thrown in.
You're right. My understanding of what's going on is that the government is just changing the terms of severance pay. These things are written into the collective agreements for each occupational group, they're pretty standardized in the agreeements I've seen, and have been in place since at least 1969. They cover three circumstances: resignation, retirement, and layoff. Getting fired is dealt with separately from severance. On resignation, you get nothing except the pay you're entitled to up to your last day at work and a payout for whatever unused vacation time you have. If you retire, you get a week's pay for every complete year of service as a severance payment, plus whatever vacation pay you're owed. If you're laid off, a different set of rules kicks in, described in what's called the Work Force Adjustment Directive. It's a large and complex document, but the main provision is that on lay off you get a year's pay. There are also provisions for education leave and assistance, job swapping, stuff like that. If you're lucky enough to be able to retire when they lay you off, and there are all sorts of complex conditions on that, about your age and years of service and other bumph, you get both the retirement severance and the layoff severance. Plus your pension of course, which really isn't as rich as people think. According to a piece in the Globe & Mail last week, the average pension paid to retired federal public servants is around $22K a year. Not exactly gold plated for most of them, you get the gold plated one only if you have 30 or more years of continuous service and retire after age 55 from a fairly senior position.
What the government's doing now, if I've understood the news reports correctly, is cancelling that retirement severance of a week's pay for every year of service, paying it out to those currently employed--that's the $6 billion--and not giving it to new hires in future. But because it's written into all the collective agreements, yes they would seem to be breaching contracts.
Pension systems are changing all over the world what was the norm is no
longer the norm. They are merely paying out what the workers were entitled
to under former agreements.
The problem for Harpie is many of the older workers are leaving and the new
ones do not know the difference between what they are trained to do and how
things really work. There is a difference you know.
This happened a number of years ago when the other guys were in power. They
bought some peole out and moved others around. About a dozen years later,
they paid out more in overtime than what the exercise was worth. Oh and they
hired back those laid off on contract to help clean up the mess they created.
This whole blame the civil service is wearing thin. This government has put us in
debt more than any government in history. In addition they overpaid on the jets.
Now blame the workers.
Oh by the way I am in favour of buying equipment for the military long over due.
What I am against is paying three times what they told us they were going to cost.
The lied and people know it plain and simple.
longer the norm. They are merely paying out what the workers were entitled
to under former agreements.
The problem for Harpie is many of the older workers are leaving and the new
ones do not know the difference between what they are trained to do and how
things really work. There is a difference you know.
This happened a number of years ago when the other guys were in power. They
bought some peole out and moved others around. About a dozen years later,
they paid out more in overtime than what the exercise was worth. Oh and they
hired back those laid off on contract to help clean up the mess they created.
This whole blame the civil service is wearing thin. This government has put us in
debt more than any government in history. In addition they overpaid on the jets.
Now blame the workers.
Oh by the way I am in favour of buying equipment for the military long over due.
What I am against is paying three times what they told us they were going to cost.
The lied and people know it plain and simple.
It looks to me like you get the best "handshake" if you are no friggin' good. Lovely.
I have a much simpler solution...........you pay guys for the hours they work and for the hours they don't work you don't pay them!:smile:
I would expect so. It is income. Sure cuts the ROI period. Flossy will be soooo stressed.
So by your lack of logic there is no point reforming MP and Senator solid gold pension plans either because we won't get instant gratification.
You want to do rooster duties for the blue rinse crowd?
"If you're laid off, a different set of rules kicks in, described in what's called the Work Force Adjustment Directive. It's a large and complex document, but the main provision is that on lay off you get a year's pay." :lol:
Getting laid off doesn't mean you're no frigging good, as you put it, it just means the government is cancelling whatever program or project or scaling back whatever activity your job was associated with. In the current round of cutbacks, for instance, it looks like the entire federal presence in Regina for agriculture is disappearing, including the few fragments that were left over after the previous restructuring destroyed a once fine, productive and useful institution, the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration. That I expect will prove to be a serious mistake. PFRA's main business was preserving the soil and water of the Canadian prairies. There was a drought in the 1980s that statistically, in terms of dryness and heat and wind, was every bit as bad as the Dust Bowl of the 1930s, but that time we didn't see whole townships blowing away and the wholesale relocation of people from what had become deserts. PFRA was the difference. That desert is still out there waiting for us to let our guard down. And now we have. Next time there's a major drought on the prairies...