Friday’s announcement of a $2 billion increase to Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members’ pay and benefits has left me with three thoughts, only one of which seems to have been fully covered in the media.
The obvious story is the pay increase: 20% for privates working full time, 13% for privates working part-time and anyone else serving at the lieutenant-colonel / commander level and below, and 8% for those at the colonel / captain (navy) level and above.
That works out to $500-$600 per month (after taxes) for the new folks, and potentially quite a bit more for some of the others.
The policy makes sense in terms of recruitment, retention, and Canada’s relations in NATO. So good for the government, but this really was a no-brainer and not a particularly difficult one.
Although some have questioned why the defence minister’s initial pledge of a 20% salary increase across the board wasn’t implemented, it seems to me that the answer is the second story: the new benefits that were announced – nearly all of which are targeted at mid-career personnel.
Teaching some of those personnel over the last two decades has provided me with some idea of the issues that have been causing them the most grief, and it seems to me that Ottawa has genuinely listened.
The additional $45 per day for serving on domestic operations, for example, recognizes that the effect on one’s family is the same whether one deploys overseas or across the country.
The additional compensation for instructors deployed to training schools not only acknowledges that some of those schools are in expensive locations but also adds prestige to jobs that have not always been appreciated by promotions boards.
Increasing the benefits provided to members who are forced to relocate based on the number of moves that they have made concedes that repeated moves get exponentially harder, especially as children get older (and even more so if the parents are no longer together).
Making food, transportation, and incidental allowances more generous when members move without their families could pay for additional childcare and other social supports, costs for which have also increased.
In sum, part of the Canadian Armed Forces’ retention challenge has been the pay structure, but what I suspect is just as important is that mid-career personnel have become frustrated that many of their ongoing, practical concerns were not being heard.
Allocating the entire compensation budget to wage increases might have made a bigger splash, but it would have ultimately reinforced the idea that Department of National Defence was tone-deaf to many of the real needs of its people.
I don’t know who was responsible for the decision to spread out the money this way, but good on them for such enlightened thinking.
The final story that I think has been missing is about the potential impact of these salary and benefits increases on relations between the Canadian Armed Forces and the rest of Ottawa.
At a time when many of the departments with whom the Department of National Defence interacts regularly – Global Affairs Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat, the Privy Council Office, Public Services and Procurement Canada, Public Safety Canada – have being called on to find 15% savings in their budgets, the CAF will be paying its people significantly more.
While other government departments are telling contract workers that they are no longer needed and contemplating a permanent reduction in their human resources footprint, National Defence is growing.
There is a risk that, should CAF members not conduct themselves with extraordinary humility in the company of others, the envy that cannot help but already exist across Ottawa could quickly turn to resentment.
Given the way that decisions get made and implemented at the federal level, such resentment could ultimately make it that much harder to get future defence dollars out the door.
One can only hope that the military, civilian, and political leadership in the Department of National Defence recognize how critical the next six months will be to the long-term success of the Canadian Armed Forces' expanded footprint.
Without an appropriate level of empathy, maintaining positive relationships around Ottawa while the rest of the town faces cuts that many have never even contemplated before could get awkward.
***
To be notified of my next post, follow me on X (Twitter) @achapnick, on Bluesky @achapnick.bsky.social or on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/adam-chapnick/.
You can subscribe to my newsletter at https://buttondown.email/achapnick.
The obvious story is the pay increase: 20% for privates working full time, 13% for privates working part-time and anyone else serving at the lieutenant-colonel / commander level and below, and 8% for those at the colonel / captain (navy) level and above.
That works out to $500-$600 per month (after taxes) for the new folks, and potentially quite a bit more for some of the others.
The policy makes sense in terms of recruitment, retention, and Canada’s relations in NATO. So good for the government, but this really was a no-brainer and not a particularly difficult one.
Although some have questioned why the defence minister’s initial pledge of a 20% salary increase across the board wasn’t implemented, it seems to me that the answer is the second story: the new benefits that were announced – nearly all of which are targeted at mid-career personnel.
Teaching some of those personnel over the last two decades has provided me with some idea of the issues that have been causing them the most grief, and it seems to me that Ottawa has genuinely listened.
The additional $45 per day for serving on domestic operations, for example, recognizes that the effect on one’s family is the same whether one deploys overseas or across the country.
The additional compensation for instructors deployed to training schools not only acknowledges that some of those schools are in expensive locations but also adds prestige to jobs that have not always been appreciated by promotions boards.
Increasing the benefits provided to members who are forced to relocate based on the number of moves that they have made concedes that repeated moves get exponentially harder, especially as children get older (and even more so if the parents are no longer together).
Making food, transportation, and incidental allowances more generous when members move without their families could pay for additional childcare and other social supports, costs for which have also increased.
In sum, part of the Canadian Armed Forces’ retention challenge has been the pay structure, but what I suspect is just as important is that mid-career personnel have become frustrated that many of their ongoing, practical concerns were not being heard.
Allocating the entire compensation budget to wage increases might have made a bigger splash, but it would have ultimately reinforced the idea that Department of National Defence was tone-deaf to many of the real needs of its people.
I don’t know who was responsible for the decision to spread out the money this way, but good on them for such enlightened thinking.
The final story that I think has been missing is about the potential impact of these salary and benefits increases on relations between the Canadian Armed Forces and the rest of Ottawa.
At a time when many of the departments with whom the Department of National Defence interacts regularly – Global Affairs Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat, the Privy Council Office, Public Services and Procurement Canada, Public Safety Canada – have being called on to find 15% savings in their budgets, the CAF will be paying its people significantly more.
While other government departments are telling contract workers that they are no longer needed and contemplating a permanent reduction in their human resources footprint, National Defence is growing.
There is a risk that, should CAF members not conduct themselves with extraordinary humility in the company of others, the envy that cannot help but already exist across Ottawa could quickly turn to resentment.
Given the way that decisions get made and implemented at the federal level, such resentment could ultimately make it that much harder to get future defence dollars out the door.
One can only hope that the military, civilian, and political leadership in the Department of National Defence recognize how critical the next six months will be to the long-term success of the Canadian Armed Forces' expanded footprint.
Without an appropriate level of empathy, maintaining positive relationships around Ottawa while the rest of the town faces cuts that many have never even contemplated before could get awkward.
***
To be notified of my next post, follow me on X (Twitter) @achapnick, on Bluesky @achapnick.bsky.social or on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/adam-chapnick/.
You can subscribe to my newsletter at https://buttondown.email/achapnick.
RSS Feed
