Veterans & Family, going forwards

Wow, ten days. Seems like an awful lot of time to prove that something the GoC and the courts has already accepted as illegal. The SISIP lawsuit was only given 2 or 3 days, when it was in the courts, and that was a far more complex case, with no real precedence.

Here's the latest sailor ;

A Class Action lawsuit has been certified with the Federal Court of Canada concerning the Earnings Loss Benefit clawed back between April 2006 and April 2012. The lead plaintiff is Raymond Michael Toth, and the court docket number is T-1068-14. The Class will be represented by Michel Drapeau Law Office and Gowlings LLP (Toronto).

The Department of Justice has consented to Certification. At present, we expect the trial to occur in January, 2017 and it will be approximately 10 days in length.

It would be nice to hear about the clawback that was done on the ELB from 2006-2012. That has been silent for such a long time. Hope that we hear more about it.

thanks again danny

propat

Extracted from Mr. Michael Blais's Facebook page

Michael Blais

Stakeholders. Lordy, lot of yipping about stakeholders now that victory is within grasp and most, if not all, have now embraced the mandate letter.

I have no idea what the criteria the new government has set reference Stake holder "summit" invitations or involvement on the six advisory groups struck. The CVA were invited by the Conservative government 5 years ago, to date., there has been no change to the status quo other than increased involvement in advisory group activity.

I do not know about many of the "newbies", there are over thirty organizations now, charities, for profit, some that are obscure. I know that we fought for inclusion, held a D Day "vigil" to remind them of their promises and the consequences of failure.

We held frank, yet always respectful discussions with the minister during budget week, the Sacred Obligation principles were once again clearly refined, particularly in reference to the promised return to the Pension Act and equality between ELB and SISIP. Hehr told me that the CVA was being invited to hold HIM to account, to ensure the promises made to veterans were fulfilled with in the mandate, which he promised to do.

I have accepted.

I fully plan on holding them to account.

I do not what the new government's criteria is in reference to the others or their motives. As you know, the Liberal promises closely resemble the CVA Harmonization plan, this is not random. We are non partisan, and after securing the NDP's support, worked the liberals damn hard, pre-Trudeau and after, seeking a harmonized return to the pension act with a plan that respects the needs of those who served in war and the older generation, many who would prefer an LSA.

Promises have been made. The CVA has been invited to some of these advisory groups and "summit" to ensure these promises are kept and provide assistance at the group level to create proposals that are truly reflective of the mandate letter and the opportunity to collectively redress the major issues.

The bump to the LSA has concerned many veterans who wish to return to the pension Act, I have been asked a hundred times if not more why would the government bump up the LSA if they are planning on returning to the Pension Act?

Of course, I do not know but were I to speculate I could think of some reasons off hand. The legion and those composing the stakeholders group rallied behind a similar number and were actively promoting during the past couple of years. They would use the tort law as justification, which bring up a second likely reason, the Equitas lawsuit and the legal reference to subparity to average tort law (negligence at the work site). Perhaps it was to provide inclusion for all who were affected by the NVC LSA; the Critical Injury Benefit was very selective, while it might have applied and satisfied the Equitas litigants injuries, restrictive criteria ensured it did not apply equally to all veterans as will the increase once it passes through legislation.

I would also note, for what it is worth to you -Im not going to argue with the anti-liberal quotient- , the mandate is clear on providing a choice between the Pension act and the LSA, with an increase to the LSA. I do not know if the 360 threshold is far as they are prepared to go, whether we can get it higher during the ongoing discussions, but I do know that the Pension Act is in the mandate letter, their is unity with every stakeholder i have spoken to re pension act return and if the government is sincere, proposals will be presented prior to the next budget that will continue to address the issues many of us have been fighting for, or suffering through, these past many years.

FYI. There were over thirty organizations present at the summit last December, I read something the other day that might indicate the "summit" number will be expanded significantly.

I would encourage you to get engaged. While things are progressing according to my expectations (it has been six months- six of the fifteen mandate letter promises are already going through parliament) there is still the need to apply pressure through the base.

Stay focused on the mandate letter and the choice of returning to the Pension Act. This is new territory for some orgs, the mandate letter has circumvented their galvanization agenda. If you want your voice heard, do something about it!

Reach out.

Start speaking out not on facebook or these never ending email chains but where it will make a difference. If nothing else, write some emails to the PM, Ministers, parl secretary, use your membership with any organization to your advantage, send an email to their national presidents encouraging them to rally formally in favour of the Pension Act promises and other important issues identified in the mandate letter.

New Initiative to Consult with Veterans Stakeholders - Advisory groups to improve transparency and engage with Veterans

OTTAWA, April 15, 2016 /CNW/ - The Honourable Kent Hehr, Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence, today announced a new initiative to broaden engagement with stakeholders. Six ministerial advisory groups are being put in place as part of his commitment to improve transparency and support consultation to address important Veterans' issues.

The six advisory groups will focus on policy, service excellence, mental health, families, care and support and commemoration. Each group will be comprised of up to twelve members, and participants will appoint a chair from their membership. A senior departmental official will also be selected to co-chair each group and a representative of the Office of the Veterans Ombudsman will be invited to attend the meetings as an observer. Current members' names will be updated as the advisory groups are established and their membership confirmed.

The overall goal is to engage with stakeholders, work toward common goals and seek advice and input on new and existing initiatives to support Veterans. The six advisory groups will help inform policy and program development as well as service delivery at Veterans Affairs Canada. This will ensure all areas reflect the changing needs of Veterans and their families. Records of discussion of these meetings will also be posted as they become available.

A Ministerial stakeholder summit with broader representation is planned for May 9-10, 2016, in Ottawa. The summit will provide an opportunity to collaborate, share views and gather information on topics that are important to Veterans and their families. This is a follow-up to the December 2015 Stakeholder Summit whose record of discussion is posted online.

Quick Facts

Advisory groups provide an opportunity for early and ongoing dialogue with stakeholders and serve as a sounding board for the development of Veterans Affairs Canada's policies, programs and services.
Advisory group members are selected in consultation with stakeholder groups and based on their interests and involvement within the Veteran community. Membership of these groups is still being finalized and will be made public once confirmed.
Veterans Affairs Canada will continue to listen to all interested and engaged stakeholders regardless of their involvement in any of these groups.
Stakeholder Summits are large, in-person events to discuss stakeholder priorities. Representatives from nearly 30 stakeholder groups attended the last Stakeholder Summit on December 2, 2015.

Quotes
"Through our new initiative, I want to create a space and forum for stakeholders to give me their advice and suggestions. It is not our position to tell Veterans and their families what they need—we want to hear from them. Our new strategy, including the six advisory groups, will help us build stronger relationships with Veterans and the organizations that represent them."
The Honourable Kent Hehr, Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister for National Defence

bigrex buds I agree fully I was just stating what I belived mike was saying and when he said it he said it was CVA,s suggestion and did not state their was unity on it .

now I think your suggestion is the best one that would be acceptable by DVA and the government at large . now just a guess here but im thinking some at the table have suggested just that . I also believe that was kind of the GOC,s intent all along .

sooooo I also think that is what the most likely outcome will be .

ya see it seems to me mike wants nothing less than TOTAL harmonization of both ACTS .

again just a guess but I think he wants this wants this in the hopes it could lead to the amalgamation of both acts as harmonization would be the first logical step to accomplish this.

propat

yes I agree with those observations as well trooper .

im very happy to here what's being disused on this issue seems to be in line with what a lot of us on here believe and that their is unity on the issue . without this info I would still be uncertain of this .

as big rex pointed out not so long ago NOT having info leads to a lot more speculation than having it .

yup the GOC sure as heck has shown so far they are not heading in this direction and I really don't expect that to change .

again this is just discussion's and suggestions the GOC can ignore ALL of this as we all know and im still expecting in regards to this matter that's exactly what they will do given their actions and comments thus far .

however even though I don't have the optimism mike has I do and always will have hope .

propat

Propat, I have no doubt that it could be suggested, but the best and simplest solution is just to raise both SISIP and ELB to 90%, period. After all, getting the RISB isn't automatic, even for those on EELB, let alone SISIP. Everyone will still have to apply for it, and meet the eligibility requirements. The only thing that could make it easier for those on LTD, would be to promote a better relationship between SISIP and VAC, so when a Veteran turns 65, the line of communication already exists.

"Once again, the mandate letter that the prime minister provided Hehjr is very definitive on the Pension Act, while it did not happen during this budget, we have to also remember the government had only been in power for five months, two of those of which were spent either in limbo until the ministers and their staffs had been hired or Christmas vacation. I know for a fact that many staffers at Veterans Affairs Canada work through the vacation in order to prepare and submit the appropriate documentation for inclusion in this year's budget. Perhaps if there was more time, more of the promises would have been addressed.

I would close by reassuring everybody once again who has concerns about the return to the Pension Act. We discussed this at length during the last policy group meeting, there is unity on this issue, the formula is clear and simple. I am very hopeful that it will be written out in the appropriate form by the co chairman's of the committee within the next month and submitted, formally, by the time we go to the stakeholder summit in May. Hopefully, the chairman will brief the "Summitr" stakeholders and there will be unified support there in. While I am confident, I also understand this is not done yet! That we must continue to apply pressure on the pension act issue until it conforms to our objectives."

I'm very appreciative of Mike being optimistic of the return of the PA , but this is the first I hear that it's even being considered.

I have not heard or seen any signals coming from our MVA that this is even on the table.

Further to this it doesn't fall inline to what we have heard from Equitas which is planning on going through or continuing the Law Suit.

So we will standby for further updates and clarification on the return of the PA.

look been following Michael Blais for years as I have
Sean Bruyea . been following ALL things vet related since 06 really .

in a previous post I wrote .

"ya nav and bigrex I allway liked this guy and mike blaise as well im sure I spelled that wrong lol.

yup both do come at it from very different angles for sure but their messages are quite similar ."

id really like at this time to expand on this ;

I like these guys for many similar reasons and some different ones as well .

they are both smart similarly principled and hold true to their principles .

they are PA guys that are fighting to restore the PA pension for the NVC guys .

neither of these guys seem to see the return of the PA pension as a negotiable position .

their are a lot more similarities but ill go on.

sean is more cerebral in his approach . where mike although he can and does hold his own in that regard can be at times a lot more confrontational .

that kinda why im a little shocked he is even their right now . don't get me wrong im glad he is . its just that the GOC knows what this guy is like and they know that he is not the guy that will just toe the line and shut his mouth. if the GOC needs to be TOLD he will TELL them and he will not mince ANY words AT ALL.

propat

ya bigrex im with saberlove on this one buds . I understand that VAC doesn't want to give Veterans who do not have service related disabilities ELB and you are right and im guessing this will not happen . however that doesn't mean mike cant suggest it .

there is no guarantee anything will come out of these discussions .

whats being DISCUSSED as it pertains to this;


the second positive quotient is the raise on the Earnings Loss Benefits and yes SISIP to the 90% threshold. there were discussions on ensuring both programs were accorded equal standards and unity at the policy advisory groups level to attain this goal.

what mike is SUGGESTING ;


At CVA level, we have suggested that all personnel who are currently on SISIP be identified by Veterans Affairs Canada and brought on the ELB rolls at 15%. Those who are eligible for Retirement Income Security Benefit support at age 65 will therefore have a seamless transition.

these are all just talks boys one important thing we can take from this is that someone is trying to provide us some info on whats happening in these talks hopefully this continues .

thanks again danny you rock buds .

propat

I think what they are talking only about are SISIP clients, that could be, or would be otherwise getting the ELB, but are not because they are on LTD already. But they would still need to meet all the criteria for ELB. VAC is not going to give ELB, and RISB to Veterans who do not have service related disabilities.

Thanks

Navrat wrote:Maybe Big Rex will know this but the comment about switching Sisip LTd clients to ELB , what does this mean? Does that mean the LTd guys will get 15 percent from VAC? Unsure?

Michael Blais wrote: "At CVA level, we have suggested that all personnel who are currently on SISIP be identified by Veterans Affairs Canada and brought on the ELB rolls at 15%. Those who are eligible for Retirement Income Security Benefit support at age 65 will therefore have a seamless transition. I would also note this addresses one of the Equitas foundations."

In order to qualify for RISB as it currently stands, you must be a client of VAC. Not everyone on SISIP LTD is a VAC client due to their reason for release injury being non-military related. Michael Blais is proposing that this is an opportunity to get everyone a VAC profile without the member having to jump through the hoops of ELB paperwork so that they don't miss out on RISB. This also ensures that no one is missed putting the onus on VAC/SISIP to get all members an ELB profile instead of putting more pressure on veterans that are papered out or don't understand the requirements of RISB or just don't know about it. I don't see this affecting the actual top up to 90% as ELB and SISIP clients will be getting it and this becomes your rate of pay. And as I said, if you come off SISIP, you'd already have a VAC file started so should accelerate the process. Very slick approach.

Sabrelove

That's a good question Teager , according to the SISIP guidelines it looks like all the calculations are based on a minimum of Corporal's pay which will be changed to senior Private if SISIP does indeed follow suit with the ELB increase.

What are the benefits under the LTD?
(For the purpose of benefit calculation, the minimum salary shall be equal to Corporal-basic).

Regular Force and Class C Reserve Force:
The LTD benefits for the Regular Force equal 75% of salary on release, less other relevant sources of income*.
For Class C Reserve Force the LTD benefits equal 75% of monthly salary, applicable at the time the illness or injury occurred, less other relevant sources of income*.

Primary Reserve Force on Class A and B Service:
For Primary reservists on Class A or B service of 180 days or less, the LTD benefits, when added to income from other sources**, equals 75% of a deemed monthly basic salary of $2,700 or 75% of your additional optional coverage if purchased.
For Primary reservists on Class B service of more than 180 days, the LTD benefits equal 75% of your monthly salary applicable at the time the injury or illness occurred, less other relevant sources of income.