CIA Reassessment Review

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by pinger on Thu 06 Jul 2017, 11:28

Vet1234 wrote " Has anyone in a similar situation , under 10 years served and DEC actually been moved from level 3 . . .

I was. Just under 5 years served, I'm not a 3b but TPI/DEC and my CIA got bumped from 3 to 2 with the relaxed CIA expansion last year. Even if not TPI, some folks finally got approved for CIA to begin with.
But this...  years served vs years left to serve I do not understand.
What I DO understand very clearly is that when that is used in conjunction with a variety if other inputs, income, and scenario's it gets VERY cloudy and is not generally advantageous across the board. JMO when I say it creates loopholes which benefits the GoC more so than veterans.

How to fix ? IDK but even if it was all replaced with one great big cookie cutter, not everyone would make out o.k.
So there you have it... snafu. Hope I made sense.

Hope you make out o.k. Taz, at least 3 weeks is better than 3 more months.

Stay well all...
avatar
pinger
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 1237
Location : Facebook-less
Registration date : 2014-03-04

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by bigrex on Thu 06 Jul 2017, 12:04

Personally, I think that the way they instituted the CIA is completely screwed up. Why should someone who served less time, and is less disabled, get more money, than someone who served longer, and is more disabled? I was getting grade 2 PIA, based on the level of disability, and now getting grade two CIA because of both level of disability and time in. But now someone who served less than 10 years, and who would might have only qualified for grade three PIA because they were still able to work, is suddenly getting grade one CIA, AND still able to work part time as long as their earnings are less than the 33% mark. If they had to take into account any factor, other than level of disability, it should have been your age. So someone in their 20's and 30's who becomes DEC, is significantly more impacted than someone who is in their 50's or 60's. because right now, someone who is 60 years old, and was medically released 20 years ago after serving 5 years, could go on CIA, and get grade one, in spite of possibly having worked full time since their medical release, as long as their condition has deteriorated to the point that they could no longer earn 33% of their imputed wages. But if someone joins when they are 18, and serves 1o years before becoming totally disabled, they would only get grade 2, in spite of losing out on 37+ years of employment opportunities.


Last edited by bigrex on Thu 06 Jul 2017, 12:08; edited 1 time in total
avatar
bigrex
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3103
Location : Halifax, Nova Scotia
Registration date : 2008-09-18

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by Vet1234 on Thu 06 Jul 2017, 12:06

Good to know. The policy change highlighted a change from level 3 to level 2 or one based on years left to serve. I hear rhetoric now of other factors being included in the determination of level. I've yet to see clear policy to match the legislation and personally believe it to be a major misrepresentation of the intent of the policy.
avatar
Vet1234
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 472
Location : Ontario
Registration date : 2016-07-27

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by pinger on Thu 06 Jul 2017, 18:17

Bigrex, it's very screwy alright.

You wrote:

"Why should someone who served less time, and is less disabled, get more money, than someone who served longer, and is more disabled?" That's just wrong.
But here is just ONE other scenario . . .

Why should someone who served less time, and is more disabled, get more money, than someone who served longer, and is less disabled?

I don't really like comparisons because they can divide... (not good) but compare a 20 y/o afghan vet with serious mental health issues to a 80 y/o Korea vet who lost a leg.
Well God knows, that can open up another huge can of worms.

Employability ? I think we all want that satisfaction. Some should NOT, but are stubborn and still try. Sound familiar anyone?
avatar
pinger
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 1237
Location : Facebook-less
Registration date : 2014-03-04

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by Vet1234 on Thu 06 Jul 2017, 18:19

I think you nailed it Pinger. 100% agree
avatar
Vet1234
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 472
Location : Ontario
Registration date : 2016-07-27

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by bigrex on Fri 07 Jul 2017, 11:18

Pinger, the thing is, that if the person is disabled more, they should get more, than someone who is disabled less, regardless of time in or rank. As far as employability, there was already a mechanism for that, with the PIAS, which paid the exact same amount, regardless of time served, OR level of disability, simply because you were TPI/DEC. the way they are doing it now, they are actually punishing those Veterans who were able to serve longer, because even if they are equally disabled, or slightly worse, they will not get the same level of support.

let's compare two severely disabled Cpl's. One served 9 years, and the other served 15. Both made $5000/mo before release. The first Veteran gets a return of contribution instead of a CF pension.

CIA grade 1 - $1799
CIAS - $1103
ELB - $4500

Second Veteran gets a 30% CF Pension of $1500

CIA grade 2 - $1199
CIAS - $1103
ELB - $4500 - $1500 = $3000

So what benefit does the second Veteran get, for having served several years more before getting disabled? This will possibly hurt the CF as well, because now anyone who is injured before the 10 or 20 year mark, may not take advantage of staying in uniform, because it could actually hurt them in the long run. That is why I think that CIA grades should be based on level of disability AND lost employment opportunity (and not just their military career), not an either or situation.
avatar
bigrex
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3103
Location : Halifax, Nova Scotia
Registration date : 2008-09-18

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by Teentitan on Fri 07 Jul 2017, 11:41

Still don't get what you are trying to say Rex. Both are making the same amount per month.
avatar
Teentitan
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3275
Location : ontario
Registration date : 2008-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by pinger on Fri 07 Jul 2017, 14:07

Hiya Rex,

Here's my simple layman's take on your example. Assuming they are both under the NVC because if one was NVC and the other Cpl was under the PA that would be a completely different scenario.

Right off the bat their monthly's are different amounts because of their different CIA grades being a 1 and 2 (Which is very wrong to me if they are identically severely disabled)

And obviously, one gets a one time return of contributions while the other one gets a monthly CF pension. That 10 year mark which is carved in granite.
Here's a real crazy thought... what if they consolidated (blended) the return of contributions with ANY amount of time served? Even playing field. No one is disadvantaged.
One year served = a $100/mos. CF pension / 20 years served =  a $2,000/mos. CF pension

On a side note, that monthly CF pension is a given for that one Cpl. In addition, for both Cpl's their ELB, CIA, and CIAS's are NOT necessarily a guarantee. Enter anyone else's scenario and esp. the finer details and things get hairy real quick...

But I understand your simple example Rex.

My 2 cents


Last edited by pinger on Fri 07 Jul 2017, 14:08; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : typo)
avatar
pinger
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 1237
Location : Facebook-less
Registration date : 2014-03-04

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by bigrex on Fri 07 Jul 2017, 14:41

teentitan wrote:Still don't get what you are trying to say Rex.  Both are making the same amount per month.

They do not get the same amount though. The first Vet would get an additional $600/mo, merely for the fact that he/she was released before getting the ten year mark. The current CIA rules make it so that regardless if whether or not you meet the disability criteria for CIA, all you need to do is prove DEC. So under 10 years served and DEC = Grade 1. 10-19 years = grade 2, and 20 years or more = grade 3. Plus the supplement. maybe the way it should be is, the grade is primarily based on the level of disability, then DEC would increase that by one grade. So if you would not otherwise qaulify for CIA, but are DEC, then you get grade three. If you already qualify for grade three, and are DEC, then you get bumped to grade two, Etc.
avatar
bigrex
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3103
Location : Halifax, Nova Scotia
Registration date : 2008-09-18

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by bigrex on Fri 07 Jul 2017, 14:58

Pinger, I understand wanting equity for everyone, but VAC does not want equity. They have set it up, so that people will all be treated differently, and most times their reasoning makes some sense, but not in this case. If they wanted to compensate veterans for specifically losing their military career, they should have come up with a separate benefit
avatar
bigrex
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3103
Location : Halifax, Nova Scotia
Registration date : 2008-09-18

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by Teentitan on Fri 07 Jul 2017, 15:01

OK as good as your points are you have to remember there is a "financial floor" that injured vets have to meet as determined by VAC.

This is where the CF pension's come into the VAC equation to achieve the "financial floor". In a perverse way of the math that VAC does they include the return of pension contribution for veteran #1, in your example. Only VAC uses the return of contribution when said veteran reaches age 65. The age where vet #2 pension continues with CPP whereas vet #1 is going to see a reduction at age 65 as he has no pension like vet #2.

We need to remember that VAC always does their calculations not in the now but in the future. Stupid? Absolutely. But it's a reality.

The only payment that VAC cannot consider in the math is a PA pension Pinger. If VAC was to include deducting a PA pension then another lawsuit would be launched, most likely by SISIP, as it has been legally labeled basically a "non existing payment".

avatar
Teentitan
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3275
Location : ontario
Registration date : 2008-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by bigrex on Fri 07 Jul 2017, 15:21

teen, explain how VAC uses a return of contribution at age 65? Since they are both on EELB, at age 65, when they start collecting the RISB, they are both going to receive 70% of their pre-65 benefits, reduced by anything they get from CPP, OAS and CF pension, just like it's deducted from EELB. So if Vet #1 receives more than vet #2 before age 65, he will receive more after age 65.
avatar
bigrex
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3103
Location : Halifax, Nova Scotia
Registration date : 2008-09-18

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by Teentitan on Fri 07 Jul 2017, 15:28

Veteran one gets his return of pension contributions and their belief is like the lump sum payment under the NVC. The medically released veteran "invests" the money for the future.

That's how VAC thinks when the NVC was implemented....invest money to help in the future.

Vet #1 will not receive more then vet #2 after age 65 because vet#1's CPP payment will be significantly less, or most likely CPP bare minimum, compared to vet#2 CPP payment.

avatar
Teentitan
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3275
Location : ontario
Registration date : 2008-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by pinger on Fri 07 Jul 2017, 16:05

Interesting. The return of contributions you mention teen I got a long time ago. But very similar to a one time pay out i.e. lump sum. One is a P Award while the other is Tax land.

"The medically released veteran "invests" the money for the future." Somewhat similar to a 22 y/o young NVC vet getting say $100,000 and investing it?  Here hoping...

When I got my return of c, it was my lottery that kept me going and a roof over my head.
Probably similar somewhat to how a P/A leaves some folks these days.

I know Trooper....Rolling Eyes this is off the topic. But it's all good.
avatar
pinger
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 1237
Location : Facebook-less
Registration date : 2014-03-04

Back to top Go down

Re: CIA Reassessment Review

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum