Evidence of meeting #32 for Veterans Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was years.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:35 a.m.
Military and Royal Canadian Mounted Police Veteran, As an Individual
I suppose I can only speak for myself. I had to get old, sir, to find out that I was losing money.
10:35 a.m.
Retired Constable, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, As an Individual
That would be my answer.
10:35 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Andrews Liberal Avalon, NL
You two are not the only ones who have gotten old in the last 30 years. I just want to get a little history behind that.
10:35 a.m.
Military and Royal Canadian Mounted Police Veteran, As an Individual
In the military we're accustomed to saying “Yes, sir” and just getting on with our jobs.
Go ahead, I'll leave that.
10:35 a.m.
National President, Syndicat des agents correctionnels du Canada, Confédération des syndicats nationaux (CSN)
Maybe I don't want to go back to 1966, because I was born in 1964.
10:35 a.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
November 5th, 2009 / 10:35 a.m.
National President, Syndicat des agents correctionnels du Canada, Confédération des syndicats nationaux (CSN)
You are from the Liberal Party.
Our union has been trying since 2002 to negotiate improvements to our pension plan. In 2005, your government amended that act that allows a pension to go from 2% to 2.33%. I repeat, we would like to find the forum where we could explain our views: why 25, why 2.33%?
Why could we get better than other groups? It is a question of fairness. If we recognize that some groups can leave after 35 years' service with 70% of salary, why do we let people leave after 25 years' service, without regard for the purchasing power the others have after 35 years' service? This is an essential question.
I am not minimizing the importance of other job categories, but they way they work is different from ours. It is recognized that after 35 years' service or more, they can get 70% of their salary. We are given the right to leave after 25 years, but then we get 50% of salary. We don't have the same purchasing power. We are told to go away, but we don't have the money to leave. In my workplace, no one works for 35 years. I said that when I began my presentation this morning; the inmates are always young, while we age, physically and mentally. Everywhere we go, we keep saying we want to have the chance to put what was allowed in 2005, the 2.33% rate, into practice.
This morning, I have heard comments about the fact that we are unionized. Being unionized does not always mean it is easier. Relations with Treasury Board are not always easy. The government passes laws, like Bill C-10 that was recently passed. It is all very well to be unionized, but we are still affected by that.
The union wants to sit down, talk, and look at the impacts. We are prepared to look at all of it. We have been working on it since 2002. There has been some progress and certain things have been resolved. The Act has enabled us to do some things, but we are not finding the forum where we could finish the job. This is what is taking so long. The next generations will have to engage in the same debate if we don't resolve it now.
Give us fairness, that will allow us to leave with the same salary rate as public servants who leave their positions after 35 years' service and receive 70% of their salary. You are giving us the right to leave earlier, but we don't have the money that would allow us to do it.
10:35 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Andrews Liberal Avalon, NL
Mr. White, you brought up, and I know others made reference to it, about paying into EI. At the end of the day, this issue is going to be about money and where we find the money to make it happen. Let's cut to the chase.
You mentioned EI and you said you don't collect EI. Is that true for all CF and RCMP members, that not one single member has or will collect EI? If you can, put it in context so we see if it's 10% or 30%. Do you follow my drift?
10:40 a.m.
Dominion Secretary, Royal Canadian Legion
I followed your drift as well as the questions that were asked on Tuesday. Categorically, there are members of the Canadian Forces who receive EI as well as members of the RCMP. My wife was a member of the Canadian Forces. She went on two maternity leaves while she was a member of the Canadian Forces. She received EI while she was on maternity leave as a member of the Canadian Forces. So yes, they do.
The issue is my receiving an annuity from the Canadian Forces. I'll never receive EI.
10:40 a.m.
Dominion Secretary, Royal Canadian Legion
I doubt I would have, never throughout my career. I don't think there was an occasion or an opportunity, because in my day we didn't have paternity leave. Now you have paternity leave in the Canadian Forces. So members who go on paternity leave receive the same thing as those members who went on maternity leave, and they probably receive EI. This is past my time in the Canadian Forces.
10:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you, Mr. White.
Thank you, Mr. Andrews.
I'm sorry, Madam Sgro, there's no more time to share with you.
We'll now go over to Mr. Kerr.
10:40 a.m.
Conservative
Greg Kerr Conservative West Nova, NS
Yes, Mr. Chair.
What I want to do--and I was speaking with Mr. Stoffer earlier--is get a motion in here, and we need some time to discuss it. I want to know if it's appropriate to make that motion now.
10:40 a.m.
Conservative
10:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
If we're going to go to business, I will excuse the witnesses, unless, Madam Sgro, you have some issue with that.
10:40 a.m.
Liberal
Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON
Are you suggesting that we no longer hear from the witnesses and start to deal with the motion?
10:40 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Yes, that's correct. We go into some business, and I was going to give them two minutes each.
10:40 a.m.
Liberal
Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON
I recognize the desire we have to deal with this issue and move it forward, but I'm not comfortable for it to go forward. We're scheduled to have another meeting next week, I believe. Where's the clerk?
10:40 a.m.
A voice
Not next week.
10:40 a.m.
Liberal
Judy Sgro Liberal York West, ON
Well, I mean the next week. I'd come back next week, but I don't want to ask you guys to do that. But are we not scheduled for a third meeting on this, if necessary?
10:40 a.m.
Conservative