Troops compensation not enough

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by bitterandtwisted, Jan 16, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Story below. This however is better news now they have upped the amount, but clearly still not enough..... thanks to Liarbour

    linky clicky clacky cloo
  2. the_boy_syrup

    the_boy_syrup LE Book Reviewer

    £285k won't even buy a decent house never mind make all the changes a wounded solider may need before he can move in
    If Ben Parkinson lives until he is 60 it only works out at £7702 per year
    I know someone will come on and say he will get his benifits and all off that but what happens once his parents die or get to old to provide the care he needs who wil pay then when he needs full time proffesional care?

    Although I can see alot of trapped fingers etc for the beer fund
    £1,050 for a hernia or fractured finger.
  3. Has anybody else noticed that they've just upped the ADT contributions as well (possibly to pay for this) :(
  4. The basic cause of what is wrong is that if a civvy is injured in the line of his employment he can sue his employer for damages. A soldier can't because of the so called Crown Immunity. Thus the compensation scheme is in lieu of (less than) the rights that everybody else enjoys. Given the hazardous nature of the job that can't be right. Furthermore youngsters joining are very rarely aware even in general terms what will be their future if they are injured. Our man (the one told to remove his uniform at Selly Oak) has founded his action (claim for 2.5 million) in negligence. We shall see.

    Furthermore someone suggested that the guy here would get his benefits. As they are means tested he probably wont. £7,000 pa over a lifetime is a pittance.
  5. No. IIRC he gets about 20k/yr as well.
  6. It's not just about compensation but also war pension and disability allowances (including for carer). The lump sum should pay for immediate needs and the pension and other allowances for future needs.

    I work in the mine clearance business and all employees working for an accredited organisation have to be insured. Insurance for this dangerous work depends on country of residence of the individual but, for UK citizens, stands at around £300k for death, permanent disability, complete loss of sight and loss of limb above ankle or wrist. Without pension rights.

    Maybe the government has taken the insurance criteria as a benchmark for an acceptable compensation payment and not civilian claims in court paid out for employers negligence which tends to be higher?
  7. Well possibly that is the benchmark. But it does not include what most people would properly regard as *compensation*. ie a bit (a lot) of bunce for giving away your life in that way. Most civvies think that soldiers somehow just *deserve more*. I agree with them. The War Pensions are a joke and shouldn't be mentioned at all IMHO.
  8. cpunk

    cpunk LE Moderator

    It's slightly more complicated in that the capped £285,000 figure is for a one-off payment in recognition of the immediate problems caused by severe injury. Once a severely injured person has left the services, they are entitled to ongoing compensation for loss of earnings which is theoretically unlimited.

    The issue seems to me to be that - as someone has already said - in today's market - £285,000 won't buy a lot of house, particularly when it may have to be specially adapted, particularly when an individual comes from the South-East, for example. And presumably, the loss of earnings compensation is based on a future career in the military. The fact of the matter is that many severely injured service personnel will be young, well motivated people, who might have gone on to great things after leaving the service. In my view, the compensation scheme should include a premium to recognise this. Severely injured service personnel should not have to worry about their future, as a nation we have a duty to ensure they are properly looked after.
  9. Wholehaertedly agree Cpunk
  10. I agree with what you say ... but compensation can not differ from one person to another in regard to house prices where they might live. And for the severly disabled, those on war pension, benefits and/or not working, adaptions to houses can be carried out free of charge by your local council.

    In respect of my bold in your text; Please don't forget that severe disablement does not automatically preclude a person from work; as you rightly state, most will be young and well motivated and not wish to sit out the next 70 or so years of their lives. Loss of limb or mobility can be overcome in many circumstances (not all). I consider myself lucky that, although I lost a limb, apart from an eight month period, I have continued to be employed.

    Compensation needs to reflect immediate needs of the injured as well as future and continueing needs.