Standing Committee on VAC – Continuum of Transition Services June 16th

Standing Committee on VAC – Continuum of Transition Services June 16th

General framework for the study

When members of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) are ill or injured, whether or not the injury or illness is service-related, they may be medically released if their condition causes their long-term inability to be deployed with their unit. This release also means that responsibility for the member’s rehabilitation and compensation will be transferred from the Department of National Defence (DND) to other stakeholders, in particular, Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) and the Service Income Security Insurance Plan (SISIP). The process that begins the moment a member becomes ill or injured can be complex, and the programs established to support the member’s transition are numerous. As a result, it can be difficult for members, veterans and the public to navigate them, and misunderstandings may arise.

With this study on the continuum of services, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs wishes to determine the key steps in this process, identify the programs available to serving members, veterans and their families at each of these steps, and establish an outline of the respective responsibilities of the various parties involved. The Committee hopes that this study will help point up the stronger and weaker points along this continuum in order to facilitate a sound transition to civilian life for injured members.

This document provides an overview of the transition process based on testimony heard from witnesses during the seven meetings the Committee held on this topic between February 26 and April 23, 2015. Its purpose is to outline the steps and time frames of the transition process and to highlight the issues identified by witnesses. The continuum of transition services is divided into three phases:
• The period starting when an injury or illness appears and ending when the decision is made to release a CAF member for medical reasons;
• The period between the decision to release a CAF member for medical reasons and the actual release;
• The adjustment period, of approximately two years following the release, and during which Veterans Affairs Canada services replace those provided by the Canadian Armed Forces.

The purpose of this report is not to provide another review of all the programs and services that Veterans Affairs Canada can offer to veterans; rather, it is to highlight the lesser-known elements of the transition process, such as what programs are available from the Canadian Armed Forces before the Veterans Affairs Canada programs take effect, what coordination measures are taken by both departments during the transition process, and what initiatives are available through third-party organizations that complement government measures.

Report 6 – Continuum of Transition Services (Adopted by the Committee on June 16, 2015; Presented to the House on June 18, 2015) http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=8049069&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=2&File=9

Posted in News | Leave a comment

Dangerous Déjà Vu for Veterans: Send the Omnibus Plate Back to the Chef By Sean Bruyea

From Sean Bruyea, full transcript of Hill Times Article

Dangerous Déjà Vu for Veterans: Send the Omnibus Plate Back to the Chef
By Sean Bruyea

In a bizarre and never-ending déjà vu, government is ramming through Parliament the fourth piece of veterans’ legislation in a decade. It is plainly bad legislation swallowed inside yet another budget omnibus bill.

The proposed veterans’ programs are joined by a torrent of feel-good political announcements. Does the hype match reality?
Do the programs fill the identified gaps and address the evidence-based recommendations?

No and no. The proposed veterans’ legislation should be sent back to the kitchen until what was ordered by veterans is finally served after 10 years of painful hunger.

Retirement Income Security Benefit

A new Retirement Income Security Benefit claims it will top up to 70% of what the veteran received from government prior to age 65. However this is based upon the veteran’s income loss benefit which already reduces military salary to 75%. This income loss benefit is inadequately adjusted for inflation to a maximum of 2% since military release from 1953 onwards. In the past twenty years, inflation has been above 2% nine of those years. Seventeen of the previous 20 years were above 2%.

For example, veterans released in 1996 have had their earnings loss benefit increased by approximately 30% while military salaries have increased 80%.

The retirement benefit therefore equates to the veteran effectively receiving 52.5% of their military salary, inadequately adjusted for inflation. The Ombudsman, Guy Parent, was quick to endorse this program during a partisan political announcement. Yet, Mr. Parent’s office clearly recommended a retirement benefit matching 70% of release salary, fully indexed for inflation.

The majority of veterans’ groups active in advocacy, the ombudsman, VAC’s own advisory groups and Parliament in 2010 have all repeatedly recommended that the 75% earnings loss benefit be substantively increased to anywhere from 90 to 100% of release income matching salary increases of a typical career of promotions. Civilian courts have been doing this for decades. Implementing this universally supported recommendation would result in a dignified income loss program which would in turn provide a dignified retirement benefit for our most injured veterans.
The consequence of government’s repeated dismissal of this evidenced-based research and recommendation: a paltry payout from this proposed retirement benefit which will go to just 261 veterans with disabilities by 2020.

Family Caregiver Relief Benefit

The Family Caregiver Relief Benefit is another puzzling creation. Only 351 family members by 2020 will qualify out of the anticipated 6000 totally impaired and disabled veterans.

No veteran group, parliamentary committee, ombudsman or advisory group asked for a benefit in this form. What others have asked for is everything from matching the DND Caregiver Benefit which pays up to $36,500 over any 365 cumulative days to providing spouses of disabled veterans with their own benefit to compensate for lost income in their poorly appreciated efforts to care for their struggling veteran spouses. One of the easiest solutions would be merely to open up the existing attendance allowance program to all injured veterans. The proposed family caregiver benefit pays $7238 per year equivalent to the lower levels of attendance allowance which pays up to $21,151.44 annually.

Critical Injury Benefit

The Critical Injury Benefit will provide a one-time payment of $70,000 to Canadian Forces members and veterans “for severe, sudden and traumatic injuries or acute diseases that are service related, regardless of whether they result in permanent disability”. Countless veterans have come forward telling us that disabling PTSD, traumatic brain injury or loss of organ function are being low-balled below the approximately $40,000 average lump sum payment for pain and suffering. How can government justify to veterans enduring lifelong disability that their pain and suffering merits far lower a payment than a veteran who temporarily suffered an injury?

This leads to the obvious question: from what obscure bureaucratic orifice did this proposal originate? Absolutely no one in the veterans’ community, the ombudsman’s office, parliament or advisory groups asked for this benefit. We know little of the criteria but we know it is highly restrictive: only two or three individuals per year will receive it from a totally disabled and permanently incapacitated population of 6000 veterans in 2020 and a current CF serving and veteran population of nearly 700,000 individuals.

How is this in any manner fulfilling Canada’s obligation to all of our veterans and their families? It does not. Why did government not do what all have been asking: increase the amount of the lump sum benefit to at least match court awards for pain and suffering? Why have so much time and tears been expended by suffering veterans for a potpourri of political pretense grudgingly helping too few.

Canada’s Obligation to Our Veterans and Their Families
We are inundated by slick PR campaigns and political photo shoots as to the importance of military service but when it comes to addressing shortcomings for those most in need, government delays, deflects and unfortunately dances on the suffering of our veterans and their families. Much of this rhetoric is centred upon how much Canada is indebted to our veterans and their families.

The new legislation proposes an obligation to our serving members, veterans and their families to provide “services, assistance and compensation”. It is more encompassing than some previous legislation but all offer little substance and are mostly meaningless. To what end is this obligation? To rehabilitate, re-establish, to offer opportunity, well-being, quality of life, education, retraining, employment or provide a clear service standard?

Professing an obligation absence a goal is hollow at best.

Why does this proposed obligation only recognize assistance to injured members, veterans and their families? Is Canada not responsible for all veterans? The duty of the Minister in the Department of Veterans Affairs Act is “the care, treatment or re-establishment in civil life of any person who served in the Canadian Forces” and “the care of the dependants or survivors”. At one time this included “retraining”. Is all of this not what government keeps claiming the new veterans charter accomplishes but has so far abysmally failed to deliver?

Why the Legislation Should be Sent Back to the Chef

These programs if passed without substantive change will set dangerous precedent.

First, they create yet more classes and subclasses of inequity between veterans. Second, unnecessary programs result in more red tape and more work for overstaffed frontline workers when merely expanding and improving existing programs will do more. Third, they will encourage government to create discriminatory policy under a political facade while simultaneously dismissing evidence-based research and widespread consensus of those directly affected who truly understand the options available.

Finally, government’s bullying with ‘it’s better than nothing’ attitude intimidates an already subserviently indoctrinated military culture to accept paltry scraps to compensate for genuine sacrifice and life-altering disabilities. Caving into bullying disguised as sweet-talk effectively endorses shoddily concocted programs. This gives license to government again to do nothing for the next five, ten or more years to fix these abominations while government ignores a host of outstanding programs veterans and their families need now.

Veterans must realize they deserve what they need and have it delivered in a timely fashion. Why would anyone swallow that which was never ordered or a spoonful from the menu haphazardly fried up a decade ago? Veterans deserve to have the dish remade as requested. Isn’t a fair and square meal the minimum that lifelong sacrifice deserves?

And let’s stop hiding veterans, let alone any unrelated legislation, in omnibus bills or otherwise ramming veterans’ programs through parliament.

Almost 120,000 Canadians have lost their lives and hundreds of thousands more have lived and continue to live with lifelong disabilities. They have done this to serve our nation in protecting democracy and its vital pillars of transparency, accountability and due process. Surely Parliament can do better for its veterans. Send the programs back to the chef.

Sean Bruyea, vice-president of Canadians for Accountability, is a retired Air Force intelligence officer and a frequent commentator on government, military, and veterans’ issues.

Posted in News | Leave a comment

Sit Rep. Bill C-59 -Democracy bastardized?

Sit rep. Just received a phone message from Peter Stoffer , Veterans critic of the NDP. He has informed me the conservatives will not consider resolutions that the CVA has proposed to ensure their is equality in recognition in serious wounds, whether they be physical or mental in nature. Nor will others testimony be considered. (Unless, of course, they agree with policy) This is profoundly disappointing, tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayers money have been expended bringing witnesses to Ottawa, hearing testimony… only to have our voices completely ignored.

Were they ever intended to be heard? Was all the time and effort that I and other witnesses took to prepare and attend these events in Ottawa just part of some political charade… and at what expense? Is this how the government respects our tax dollars? Dog and pony shows to speak to issues already decided months ago?

Bletch.

Here is what the CVA presented before committee last Tuesday evening so that you are up to date.

Good evening. My name is Michael Blais, I am the president and founder of the Canadian Veterans Advocacy. Thank you for inviting me to attend committee to tonight to speak to Bill C-59 and the creation of new programs designed to improve the quality of life for Canada’s disabled veterans.

It is very gratifying to me to note that several of the primary issues that I founded the Canadians Veterans Advocacy in 2010 have been recently addressed and while there is a certain degree of skepticism within the veterans community I serve as to the timing of the these announcements and the looming election, I am hopeful that the government is acting in good faith and that there will be merit to these discussion.

I understand there is only so much we can do with the limited time available to us and to that end, I should like to focus on shortcomings that I believe that can be, if the government is acting in good faith, resolved at this time to ensure the proposals which have been brought forward will be inclusive to all veterans, not just those who experience physical trauma.

Critical Injury Benefit – I believe that this is a positive development, however, what is very troubling to me is the fact that many who have sustained mental wounds will be excluded due to the “Immediate” prerequisite within the proposal. This exclusion is detrimental to our collective objective to eliminate stigma, to ensure those who have sustained mental wounds are assured that the pervasive, health insidious stigma does not relegate the seriousness of their sacrifice, as this does, to a lower state of recognition.

There must be equality in acknowledgement of all serious wounds, physical or mental and I would respectfully remind committee members that mental wounds are just as lethal as physical wounds. We must acknowledge the grim fact that more of Canada’s Sons and Daughters have died as a consequence of suicide than the nation sacrificed during the War on Terror and without effective intervention, this number will only rise. Furthermore, we must be cognizant that these intensely tragic numbers speak only to one segment of the issue as Veterans Affairs Canada does not track suicides within the veterans community, that these numbers may be exponentially higher.

We know now that mental wounds, when incurred during an operational period, are often not recognized or acknowledged by the individual until returning home and the cycle of despair begins to ravage the mind, adversely affecting self and the the family unit. We also understand that many of our heroes suppress acknowledging the seriousness of the wound, fearful of stigma and career ending ramifications until mental discord occurs and finally, the treatment that is so necessary provided.

We must consider all serious national sacrifice equally. It should matter not whether you have sustained a physical or a mental wound, should it qualify to the requisites of the CIB yet, for a mental wound is bereft of immediate hospitalization, that amendments will be made to respect the national sacrifice of those who have sustained serious mental wounds as a consequence to their service, that they to will be included in this compensatory proposal.

Caregivers Allowance. This too is a positive step forward, aligning the NVC provisions with that of the Pension Act and providing annual respite for primary caregivers who have been consigned to a lifetime of caring for a seriously disabled veteran. Once again, however, caregivers who are caring for veterans who have sustained serious mental wounds have been virtually excluded. Spouses who care for their husbands 24/7, fearing the spectre of suicide on a daily basis, are not accorded the opportunity for dedicated respite knowing their loved ones are cared for.

There must be equality, recognition that the impact that a mental wound bears upon the caregiver is extraordinary, that the threat of the wound manifesting catastrophically is clear and present long after a physical wound has been deemed non life threatening. I would encourage you to recognize the travail caregivers of mental wounds are experiencing, amend the legislation to include the plight of families that are dealing with mental wounds.

Retirement Income Supplementary benefit. This has been a cornerstone principle of the CVA since conception, the plight of our disabled veterans when reaching age 65. Disabled veterans, ladies and gentlemen, disabled. The foundation of the RISB, a comparative to the average Canadian’s post retirement income at 70% of 75%, negates the Disabled quotient completely. We are not speaking of ordinary Canadians, but disabled veterans bereft of a lifetime of opportunity to prepare for retirement. Disabled veterans do not retire from being disabled, indeed as they grow older, they require additional supplements such as VIP.

We believe that there should be no reduction, that the 70 of 75 percent equation does not respect the needs of a disabled veteran and that the RISB should ensure that quality of life provision to which they have been accorded, which is the foundation of VACs mandate, is maintained at 75%.

We also find it disingenuous to include the Permanent Impairment Allowance, an award that recognizes the fact that seriously disabled veterans require financial support to cope with their wounds in addition to the 75% ELB/SISIP provisions. into the harmonization of income requisites. Once again, these are seriously impaired veterans, to negate the PIA’s mandate through the RISB clawback formula, despite the fact that they are still seriously disabled and have already sustained a significant fiscal reduction when reaching age 65, will consign them to a life of poverty. We have also grave concerns of the proposals of 50% of 70% to dependents should the veteran pass prior to the spouse is grotesquely insufficient.

There must be equality in recognition of national sacrifice, a serious, life altering wound must treated with the same level of respect regardless of whether it is physical or mental in nature. I have come here to attempt to convince you to fulfill this obligation, this Sacred Obligation, to the Valiant who have sustained serious mental wounds and their families who have offered such profound sacrifice on behalf of this magnificent nation.

Thank you

Posted in News | Leave a comment

Status Update On OVO Priorities And ACVA Recommendations – Veterans Ombudsman : Mise à jour sur les priorités du BOV et les recommandations d’ACVA – Ombudsman des vétérans

Status Update On OVO Priorities And ACVA Recommendations – Veterans Ombudsman

Hard to keep track of all the improvement recommendations that have been made for Veterans? I’ve created a series of easy to read tables that highlight recommendations by my office and ACVA and clearly show where things sit and what remains to be done to support Veterans. Have a look at it and share it with others!

http://bit.ly/1Bm776v

—-

Mise à jour sur les priorités du BOV et les recommandations d’ACVA – Ombudsman des vétérans
http://bit.ly/1FzUzMD

Posted in News | Leave a comment

A VETERAN’S VOICE by WOLF WILLIAM SOLKIN “NO REGARD……NO RESPECT……NO REMEMBRANCE”

A VETERAN’S VOICE

by

WOLF WILLIAM SOLKIN

IMG1134

“NO REGARD……NO RESPECT……NO REMEMBRANCE”   

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

If I may be permitted, in this column I’m going to take the liberty of making a detour away from my more traditional subject matter about the cares and concerns facing the  venerable Veterans confined to barracks at Ste. Anne’s Hospital.   Instead, I trust you will forgive me for getting a whole shipload of  annoyance and resentment off my chest, about an issue which, though it might seem unimportant  to some, is of strong significance and meaningful memories to me and many others; i e.,devoting due regard to the feats and fetes, such as VE Day, of intense importance to the remaining World War Two Veterans, plus innumerable family members and friends of the real heroes,those KIA comrades whom we had no choice but to lay to rest, “Over There”. Which is my long-winded way of wending around to the latest burr under my well-worn saddle…..the recent proud, public commemorations of the 70th Anniversary of V-E Day, (which occurred on the eighth day of May, 1945, when my Regiment was still doing battle in Germany), were wildly and widely celebrated and publicized, on an international level,  by Veterans and civilians alike, in most venues across the free world, especially Holland which forever hails the Canadians as its hallowed liberators. But there was one notably egregious exception to these festivities, of which I am personally and painfully aware : .Ste. Anne’s Hospital, where I reside, along with an ever-dwindling number of other WW ll Vets, to whom V-E Day means as much, if not more, than their own birthdays !  That otherwise fine facility paid this auspicious event about as much respect and attention as I would expect from some adolescent with a severe case of ADHD, who. had missed  his daily dose of Ritalin !…. Not even a solitary “Post-it” note on an obscure bulletin board…how delinquent ;  how disgraceful ! Many of us still had our own “boots on the ground” (or air, or sea , as the case may be) on that unforgettable and historic day,when Hitler’s “Thousand Year Reich” breathed it final fetid poisonous breath after six unimaginable years of its horrific crimes against humanity. The lights of life and liberty were once again lit up for all of us to look anew upon our world, with its priceless and indispensable “Four Freedoms” fully intact and in place. Small wonder then, that so many thousands of people, in so many hundreds of cities   and in so many dozens of  countries  from A to Z, (Australia to Zanzibar), recognized and celebrated that special, delirious day with joyous jubilation,and paid such high honours to the ex servicemen and women who brought V-E Day into being by their own blood, sweat and sacrifices.  But what was confoundedly conspicuous by its absence  and indifference vis a vis V-E Day ?…yet again, that dubious distinction is deeded to my very own Ste. Anne’s Hospital ! My instinctive first and fair step was to find the facts  directly from the very top, but the lack of true gravitas and surfeit of obfuscation in the reply struck me as a belated bundle  of lame excuses , masquerading as real reasons, in a weak attempt to play “catch-up”. In that  moment an epiphany descended upon me, to the extent that I could no longer choke back my chagrin at such denigration of. this distinguished “Day of Victory in Europe”. Hence this disdainful diatribe against another instance of  blundering bureaucratic blindness. Now that I have vented my frustrations, and hopefully elicited your agreement with this grumpy old Vet’s viewpoint, let us hope and pray that somebody, somewhere in the world outside these otherwise welcoming walls, will hearken to my plea that , above all else, we must ever pay tribute and give honour to those who granted us the greatest gift of all…the right to live our  lives free from fear of an unthinkable “WMD”  (World of Mass Destruction). The very least we can do is remember that, while it is my personal truth that “Every Day Is Veterans’ Day”, V-E Day is, and will forevermore, be much more than just any other day ! As always,

Lest We Forget,………….

LEAVE NO VET BEHIND !

Posted in News | Leave a comment

Veterans Professional Association of Canada

Michael Blais
21 hrs

What would YOU say to a Veterans Professional Association of Canada? I have been working on this issue for a couple of years now and most recently established high level contact-discussions with a major national unions (UNIFOR) to discuss setting up a community based (Veterans) professional association that would provide PRO ACTIVE and dedicated services to OUR community.

Over the past four years of advocacy, it has become clear to me that the wounded and disabled of all eras deserve and require an organization that is dedicated to their care/safeguarding their quality of should they suffer or have suffered a mental or physical wound on while serving this nation. The PA envisioned will focus on ensuring full justice is served through the claim process and that members of the professional association have a dedicated team of medical-legal advocates. The PA will provide individual attention throughout the entire process and ensure quality of care standards associated with the injury and Veterans Affairs Canada support is comprehensive and delivered in an expedient manner.

Imagine the amount of stress this would alleviate from your life, imagine having the ability to appeal unjust awards with a dedicated team at your side

We need help, consistency, confidence that those that are acting on our behalf are dedicated to our plight and willing to take the comprehensive measures required.

Think about it, I am, as always, in consultation mode and would appreciate your input.

Be advised, I am an advocate, while I fully intend on setting up the foundations, joining and supporting the VPA when it established, I have no intentions of serving in any other capacity other than as a concept organizer.

I am old, the mission to date have borne consequences on my health and once the principles I have founded the Canadians Veterans Advocacy have been attained, I plan on fading unto obscurity.

Thoughts.

https://www.facebook.com/MPPAC?fref=nf

Posted in News | Leave a comment

The Veterans Hiring Act – MAY 2015 – Loi sur l’embauche des anciens combattants – Commission de la fonction publique

The Veterans Hiring Act – MAY 2015

 

“Proposed Amendments to the Public Service Employment Regulations following the coming into force of the veterans hiring act.”

 

http://canadianveteransadvocacy.com/Board2/index.php?topic=15466.0

 

 

Loi sur l’embauche des anciens combattants – Commission de la fonction publique

 

En prévision de l’entrée en vigueur de la Loi sur l’embauche des anciens combattants http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/2015_5.pdf , la Commission de la fonction publique (CFP) prévoit modifier les dispositions relatives aux droits de priorité des membres des Forces canadiennes qui sont prévues au Règlement sur l’emploi dans la fonction publique.

 

http://canadianveteransadvocacy.com/Board2/index.php?topic=15449.0

Posted in News | Leave a comment

List of all Pensionable condition (VAC) – Liste de toute condition pensionné de ACC

List of all Pensionable condition  (VAC) – Liste de toute condition pensionné de ACC

Ex. Umbilical Hernia, Abrasion dental, non-hodgkins lymphona, heavy metal poisoning, tension headaches, PTSD heaadachaes, MS, guillain barre syndrome,

http://canadianveteransadvocacy.com/VACDND_Services-Benefits/?p=527

Posted in News | Leave a comment

Loi sur l’embauche des anciens combattants – Commission de la fonction publique

En prévision de l’entrée en vigueur de la Loi sur l’embauche des anciens combattants http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/2015_5.pdf , la Commission de la fonction publique (CFP) prévoit modifier les dispositions relatives aux droits de priorité des membres des Forces canadiennes qui sont prévues au Règlement sur l’emploi dans la fonction publique.

La CFP est heureuse de partager avec vous la présentation ci-jointe qui présente et explique les changements proposés. Veuillez noter que les « Notes » contiennent des informations importantes et font donc partie intégrante du document.

Si vous avez des questions, veuillez communiquer avec la CFP à l’adresse suivante :

CFP.DEP-PDD.PSC@cfp-psc.gc.ca

————-

Modifications proposées au règlement sur l’emploi dans la fonction publique suite à l’adoption de la loi sur l’embauche des anciens combattants

OBJECTif DE LA PRÉSENTATION

Présenter et expliquer les modifications que la Commission de la fonction publique (CFP) propose d’apporter au Règlement sur l’emploi dans la fonction publique (REFP) suite aux modifications qui seront apportées à la Loi sur l’emploi dans la fonction publique (LEFP) par la Loi sur l’embauche des anciens combattants (LEAC).

La Commission de la fonction publique (CFP) est un organisme indépendant qui s’assure que les nominations à la fonction publique sont faites au mérite. La CFP administre la Loi sur l’emploi dans la fonction publique (LEFP), le Règlement sur l’emploi dans la fonction publique (REFP), et élabore des lignes directrices sur les nominations.
La LEFP régit les nominations à la fonction publique et au sein de celle-ci. Elle autorise la CFP à préciser certaines de ses dispositions par règlement. La CFP a donc pris le REFP, qui établit notamment des droits de priorité réglementaires et en prescrit les conditions d’application.

Droit de priorité : Le droit, accordé à certaines personnes, d’être nommées avant les autres (« en priorité ») à la fonction publique, si elles satisfont aux qualifications essentielles du poste.

La Loi sur l’embauche des Anciens Combattants

Un des objectifs de la LEAC est d’offrir aux membres des Forces canadiennes (FC) libérés pour raisons médicales un accès accru aux postes de la fonction publique.

À son entrée en vigueur – sur ordre du Gouverneur en conseil – la LEAC accordera aux membres des FC libérés pour des raisons médicales attribuables au service un droit de priorité légal (c.à.d. prescrit par la loi) prééminent de nomination aux postes de la fonction publique fédérale qui est assujettie à la Loi sur l’emploi dans la fonction publique (LEFP). La CFP sera responsable d’établir les conditions de ce droit (nouvel article 39.1 de la LEFP).

Les droits prioritaires accordés aux membres de la Gendarmerie royale du Canada restent inchangés.

Modifications proposées au refp

Les modifications que la CFP propose d’apporter au REFP ne concernent que les droits de priorité accordés aux membres des Forces canadiennes libérés pour raisons médicales.
Ces modifications devraient entrer en vigueur en même temps que la LEAC.

La LEAC prévoit également des droits de mobilité et de preference aux membres actifs des Forces canadiennes et aux anciens combattants. La CFP fournira des informations sur ces droits à une date ultérieure.

Le ministère des Anciens Combattants estime qu’environ 7 600 membres sont libérés chaque année.

Le  nouveau droit légal de priorité  (membres des FC libérés pour raisons médicales attribuables au service) :
s’appliquerait à tout membre qui n’occupe pas un poste à la fonction publique pour une période indéterminée;
comprendrait une période d’admissibilité de cinq ans, pendant laquelle le membre devrait satisfaire à certaines conditions (voir les Notes ci-dessous), suivie d’une période de droit proprement dite de cinq ans.
Le droit de priorité prendrait fin soit lorsque le membre est nommé à un poste pour une période indéterminée, soit lorsqu’il refuse une telle nomination, soit cinq ans après le début du droit.

Comme un des objectifs de la LEAC est d’offrir aux membres actifs et aux membres libérés pour raisons médicales accès aux postes de la fonction publique, seuls les membres qui ne sont pas déjà employés à la fonction publique pour une durée indéterminée pourront se prévaloir du droit de priorité. (Il arrive parfois que certains membres, comme les réservistes à temps partiel, aient déjà un emploi à la fonction publique. L’objectif étant atteint, ces personnes n’auraient pas droit à la priorité.)

La priorité légale serait octroyée à tous les membres des Forces canadiennes (c’est-à-dire les membres de la force régulière, les membres de la force de réserve et les membres de la force spéciale) qui sont libérés pour raisons médicales attribuables au service. C’est au Ministre des Anciens combattants que revient la responsabilité de décider si les raisons médicales sont, ou non, attribuables au service.

La priorité légale serait la plus élevée dans l’ordre de préséance. Autrement dit, la candidature des membres des Forces canadiennes libérés pour des raisons médicales attribuables au service serait prise en considération avant celle des autres bénéficiaires d’une priorité légale (notamment les fonctionnaires excédentaires au sein de leur propre organisation, les fonctionnaires en congé ou leur remplaçant, et les personnes mises en disponibilité) ou règlementaire (c’est-à-dire prescrit par le REFP).

Pour pouvoir bénéficier de la priorité légale, ces membres devront remplir toutes les conditions suivantes dans les cinq ans qui suivent leur libération :

demander leur droit de priorité (et ce, même si le ministre des Anciens Combattants n’a pas encore décidé si les raisons de leur libération médicale étaient attribuables au service);
obtenir un certificat médical indiquant qu’ils sont aptes à retourner au travail. La date prévue du retour au travail devra être dans ce même délai de cinq ans suivant leur libération; et
– ne pas être employé dans la fonction publique pour une durée indéterminée au moment où ils demandent leur droit de priorité.

La période du droit de priorité serait de cinq ans. Le droit prendrait fin soit à l’expiration des cinq ans, soit le jour où le membre est nommé pour une durée indéterminée à la fonction publique, soit le jour où il refuse une telle nomination sans motif valable ou suffisant.

Le droit de priorité réglementaire actuellement accordé aux membres des Forces canadiennes serait modifié comme suit:
Il serait octroyé à tout membre à temps plein qui n’est pas employé à la fonction publique pour une période indéterminée, et qui est libéré pour raisons médicales mais n’a pas droit à la priorité légale;
comprendrait une période d’admissibilité de cinq ans, pendant laquelle le membre devrait satisfaire à certaines conditions (voir les Notes), suivie d’une période de droit proprement dite de cinq ans.
Le droit de priorité fin soit à la nomination du membre à un poste pour une période indéterminée; à son refus d’une telle offre; à l’émission d’une nouvelle décision concernant sa libération médicale; ou cinq ans après le début du droit.

Un droit de priorité réglementaire serait accordé aux membres à temps plein (c’est-à-dire les membres de la force régulière, les membres de la force spéciale, et les membres de la force de réserve qui servent en service de réserve de classe « B » pour plus de cent quatre-vingts jours consécutifs, ou qui servent en service de réserve de classe « C ») qui sont libérés pour raisons médicales mais qui n’ont pas droit à la priorité légale, soit parce qu’ils sont en attente d’une décision (« determination »), ou parce qu’il a été décidé que leur libération n’était pas attribuable au service.

Si, pendant la période de droit réglementaire, il est décidé que la libération était, en fait, attribuable au service, le droit réglementaire du membre cesserait et un droit de priorité légale de cinq ans lui serait accordé, débutant le jour de la nouvelle décision.

La candidature des bénéficiaires d’un droit de priorité réglementaire est considérée après celle des bénéficiaires d’un droit de priorité légale.

Les conditions pour pouvoir bénéficier du droit de priorité réglementaire seraient les mêmes que celles de la priorité légale.

La période du droit de priorité serait de cinq ans. Le droit prendrait fin soit à l’expiration des cinq ans, le jour où la personne est nommée pour une durée indéterminée à la fonction publique, le jour où elle refuse une telle nomination sans motif valable ou suffisant, ou encore, le jour où le membre devient admissible au droit de priorité légal, suite à une nouvelle décision du Ministre des Anciens combattants.

Enfin, les membres des FC qui ont eu un droit de priorité – en vertu de l’article 8 du REFP – entre le 1er avril 2012 et l’entrée en vigueur de la LEAC, recevraient un nouveau droit de priorité réglementaire de cinq ans si:
le Ministre des Anciens combattants a établi que les raisons médicales ayant mené à leur libération n’étaient pas attribuables au service, ou si cette décision n’a pas encore été prise;
n’occupaient pas un poste pour une période déterminée dans la fonction publique au moment de l’entrée en vigueur de la LEAC; et
n’ont pas refusé une telle nomination.

Cette modification reflèterait les dispositions de la LEAC qui prévoit accorder un nouveau droit de priorité légal aux membres qui ont activé leur droit de priorité en vertu de l’article 8 du REFP entre le 1er avril 2012 et l’entrée en vigueur de la LEAC, s’il a été établi que leur libération médicale était attribuable au service.

Si vous avez des questions au sujet du contenu de cette présentation, veuillez communiquer avec la Direction de l’élaboration des politiques de la CFP.

dep-pdd@psc-cfp.gc.ca

Posted in News | Leave a comment

Daddy Never Came Back From Afghanistan

 

Daddy Never Came Back From Afghanistan

Daddy Never Came Back From Afghanistan

http://forces.tv/81991960

Last month Army & You spoke to a soldier’s young daughter about how PTSD affected her family’s life. This is her story…

I was born in April. My daddy was 22 and in the Army. He wasn’t there when I was born as he was away. He came to see me when I was two weeks old. He never put me down; I was a daddy’s girl already.

I was two months old when mummy and I went to live in Cyprus for six months with daddy. He was so proud of me and showed me off to all the other soldiers. He would come home whenever he could just to spend five minutes with me. When I got my first tooth he left work just to come and have a look. He said he loved me to the moon and back.

My first memory of my daddy was when he came home at weekends from work. I would sit by the window and then run out to him as soon as his car pulled up. He would pick me up and throw me in the air; he always caught me. He was so big and strong and looked so smart in his uniform. I was so proud of my daddy – he was my hero.

My daddy went to Afghanistan. I felt so scared but full of pride for my very brave daddy. I cried and couldn’t stop. I wanted to hug him forever so that he wouldn’t leave me. I was hugging him when I heard the dreadful sound of the train. This meant daddy had to let me go. I watched him go until I could see the train no more.

A few months later I was on the platform again; he was home from Afghanistan. As the people began to leave, I saw him, my daddy, my hero. I ran across the platform, everyone parted and let me through. As I reached him, he knelt down and opened his arms and I jumped into them. I could see people on the train and platform watching and crying. I had my daddy back for good or so I thought.

Daddy had been injured but I couldn’t see it. He had Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. My daddy was never the same. I was no longer daddy’s girl. Daddy treated me like the enemy. When I ran to him, he told me to go away. I tried to cuddle him and he said he didn’t want me anymore. I was so upset, angry and confused. I never thought daddy would hurt me like this.

Mummy told him to leave. Then daddy had a breakdown. He told us all the horrible things going on in his head. He said he loved us but had to go as he didn’t want to hurt us anymore.

That was two years ago. I haven’t seen him since. I will always love my daddy; he will always be my hero. Daddy went to Afghanistan but daddy never came back.

For help and advice about PTSD please click here

Posted in News | Leave a comment