# Service Couple and Deployment???



## commo_dude (1 Nov 2007)

Just wondering and needing feedback.

I am slated to deploy in June to Dec. Wife who is service couple shift worker with two small children asked to work a day position for those 6 months and was told to "take leave without pay" or find "hard daycare". The memo submitted to the CO was refused stating my wifes CO was not in her C of C and refused to send him the memo.

Basically the kids are in school all day and a babysitter raises the children for 6 months as I work days, eves and mids during each rotation.

Is there any provisions for service couples etc? I know we each sign the Family care plan.

Any feedback is much appreciated as what are the next steps, who to speak to etc.


----------



## armyvern (1 Nov 2007)

commo_dude said:
			
		

> Just wondering and needing feedback.
> 
> I am slated to deploy in June to Dec. Wife who is service couple shift worker with two small children asked to work a day position for those 6 months and was told to "take leave without pay" or find "hard daycare". The memo submitted to the CO was refused stating my wifes CO was not in her C of C and refused to send him the memo.
> 
> ...



Hmmm,

Well, I don't really know what to say to you except ... "you both submitted & signed that Family Care plan" (which you've already heard).

I've been in this situation, it sucks ... but it is the way it is. If I wasn't willing to put my family in that situation had service requirements deemed it necessary for mission accomplishment -- my service spouse and I would not have had children. That was a choice that we made, knowing full well that service requirements and working hours would come first.

Look at the bright side; at least your wife will get to see your children (and often) during that 6 month period of your deployment. There are couples out there with kids who've been operationally deployed overseas at the same time and thus their children have been left in the care of others continuously without the benefit of having a parent about. There are also married service couples with kids where one parent is posted IR to the opposite side of the country ... perhaps with one of them even being required to work shift, or go to the field (egads!!). I've also been there and done that; my kids have turned out just fine.

Your situation is really _not_ that special at all. After all, there are single parents (military & civilian) across this nation who work shift work for their entire working careers leaving their kids in the care of others while they do that.


----------



## geo (2 Nov 2007)

Vern,
Methinks that this is his 1st instance - and he's a nervous "virgin"
The kids aren't made out of porcelaine... They are amaazingly resilient and adapt to pert much everything.

Be honest & firm with them.  He is surrounded by a military community and THEY WILL support him, he only needs to ask.


----------



## Armymedic (2 Nov 2007)

You may refuse the deployment....

But every decision comes with consequences.


----------



## RCR Grunt (2 Nov 2007)

... Is no one going to comment on the fact that the CoC refused to send up the memo?  Last I checked, this was not kosher.  Your memo must be actioned to the addressed individual.  However, while it goes up it may receive poo poo stains on it in the form of minutes, but it must reach the person it is addressed to.  It must reach the individual it is addressed to and return to you with a response within 14 working days.  Her Commanding Officer is most certainly in her chain of command.  Perhaps not her immediate chain, but in her chain regardless.


----------



## armyvern (2 Nov 2007)

RCR Grunt said:
			
		

> ... Is no one going to comment on the fact that the CoC refused to send up the memo?  Last I checked, this was not kosher.  Your memo must be actioned to the addressed individual.  However, while it goes up it may receive poo poo stains on it in the form of minutes, but it must reach the person it is addressed to.  It must reach the individual it is addressed to and return to you with a response within 14 working days.  Her Commanding Officer is most certainly in her chain of command.  Perhaps not her immediate chain, but in her chain regardless.



Actually yes.

commo_dude and I have engaged via PM yesterday regarding the matter above ... you can rest assured. He has already been told exactly what you have outlined above.

Edited to add:

I have also advised him that this 'refusal' may have been a subtle hint from her WO that staffing a Memo through the CoC to the CO asking for her family to be given _special treatment _ based on their own personal choices may not be a recommended COA.

I also pointed out that, she should ensure that her memo fully substantiates exactly why their family deserves this special treatment.

Here's a quote from my PM:



> Well, from my POV as a WO ... I would also discourage her from staffing it. You guys are asking for special treatment from the CF because of choices that you made -- it does not bode well. Like I said ... hundreds (if not thousands) of fellow CF members are living the same thing ... daily due to IR, Op deployments or being single parents.
> 
> I guess, if you can substanbtiate why your family should be treated differently than them in a sound manner -- go ahead and submit the request again. If her WO refuses to staff it again, she could state:
> 
> ...



I forgot to say this though ...

I highly recommend that if she does use the statement above -- she should ensure that she concludes it with "Warrant Officer".


----------



## RCR Grunt (2 Nov 2007)

Ack.


----------



## Greymatters (2 Nov 2007)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> "This is official CF correspondance which is addressed to the CO and not yourself. I request that it be forwarded to the CO IAW CF policy governing official correspondance. If you do not agree with nor or support my request, please feel free to minute the memorandum to state as much ... then staff it through the CoC to the CO in the required manner."



Nice one - it is extremely vexing when senior members take upon themselves authority and privelages that they were never granted, but this reply sends a very clear message.  However, depending on the mental maturity of the member addressed, this will likely create a permanent pissy attitude on the senior members part.


----------



## SupersonicMax (2 Nov 2007)

I find the military (the Army seems to be a little worse than the other elements) could do a little more to people that devote their life to the organisation.  Take care of your troops??  

Don't tell me there is absolutely no way to find her a day job for 6 months (it's not that much...), or is it that people just don't want to go the extra mile for their people...

End of rant

Max


----------



## Cansky (2 Nov 2007)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> I find the military (the Army seems to be a little worse than the other elements) could do a little more to people that devote their life to the organisation.  Take care of your troops??
> 
> Don't tell me there is absolutely no way to find her a day job for 6 months (it's not that much...), or is it that people just don't want to go the extra mile for their people...
> 
> ...



Yes in theory we as leaders would love to accommodate all our soldiers, but reality is we can't.  With the growing numbers of service couples in the CF and with married personel, the numbers need for deployment on the rise, it gets harder and harder to accommodate all.  I had 50% of my section deploy overseas and still had to fill the same number of taskings within the unit.  With 50% of the remaining personnel married to a deployed soldier it was nearly impossible for us to accommodate all.  Believe me, we tried very hard to do so. So we come to a hard choices.  Do I accommodate all the troops, then tell one of the Schools sorry I have no medics to cover your courses training requirements therefore training ceases or an accident happens.  Or do I tell my troops ensure you and your family are looked after, I'll try to accommodate but it might not happen.  

I have worked with training bases, army bases and the airforce.  I have found the army to be the best at looking after their soldiers and their welfare.  
Just my 2 cents worth
Kirsten


----------



## Sub_Guy (2 Nov 2007)

Both my wife and I are in the military (3 youngins), I have yet to encounter a supervisor who wouldn't go out of their way to try accomodate us when an issue would appear.  That being said if you give 110% at work, those who you work for will most likely be willing to help you out a bit.  

I have seen certain individuals who could give 2 craps about working hard, and they are the first to complain that they are getting screwed when they have an issue that can't be resolved.

I know that manning takes priority over everything, but it is nice to know that there are people out there who will look out for you.  There are more out there that will look out for their troops, than those who could care less.


----------



## armyvern (3 Nov 2007)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> I find the military (the Army seems to be a little worse than the other elements) could do a little more to people that devote their life to the organisation.  Take care of your troops??
> 
> Don't tell me there is absolutely no way to find her a day job for 6 months (it's not that much...), or is it that people just don't want to go the extra mile for their people...
> 
> ...



And one day, when you are _actually_ leading (perhaps even a sqn !!), you'll learn NOT to fly off on a rant before you have all the facts in your little arsenal of explosives.

Commo-dude only stated the outcome of his wife's memorandum and the WOs final words to her. But, he failed to point out, in his original post, some pretty important facts. That's why, as you learn to be a "leader", WOs like myself will tell you (over & over & over again) --- ask questions!! I did that via PM ... and it worked for me.  

Facts are: 

1)  His wife works in a position that is essential manning, within a Unit which is critical to maintaining operations. That Unit is criticly undermanned, even with the straight day workers.

2)  Her WO did, in fact, lay out the reasons why he could not afford to lose her from that critical manning position (it _would_ effect ops) and that the Unit could not afford to accomodate her in this manner. He certainly didn't simply read the memorandum and look at her and say "too bad; it ain't going to happen" as the original posts infers.

(Give us WOs some credit would you Max?? -- Even AF WOs!!  . We've been around a long friggin' time and sure as shit don't need future leaders such as yourself implying that we don't give a fuck about our troops -- because that's bullshit. We have already learned to ask the important questions already before diving into a rant. One day, you will too. Get it??)

3) Her CoC (ie the WO!!) explained to her, that in her situation, (the conflict between her family situation & the operationally necessary requirements of her Unit) that the options for accomodation were such that she could attempt to find more suitable daycare (and in failing that invoke her Family Care Plan), or request to take LWOP.

Neither of these options (obviously) seem to be acceptable to this married service couple (this couple who's own personal choices have placed them in the situation they now find themselves in -- also an important factor to remember).

Via PM, commo_dude had ponited out to me that they didn't agree with the WOs observations because:

"They are telling us that they can't afford to let her go onto day shift, but they CAN afford to let her go on leave for 6 months and be totally short a body."

I pointed out to him, that even though that may seem like the case -- it is not. As the granting (and even the offering of allowing his spouse to take LWOP for the time period in question is, in fact, QOL Accomodation of their self-imposed family situation by the Unit) of LWOP would essentially remove her name from the Unit Org chart ... thus the kicking in of funding to hire (ARAF) Class B to fill her essential position during her absence would occur.

Their family gets what they want (ie one parent home with the kids for the 6 months vice being raised by caregivers) and the CF can continue operating as it requires. Sometimes, that's just the way it is and the way it has to be. 

One day, when you lead a Sqn -- you will very quickly learn that you simply can NOT accomodate single-parents within your Unit who don't want to work shift (so their kids aren't being raised by caregivers), every person whose spouse gets posted IR across the nation who therefore doesn't want to work shift (so their kids aren't being raised by caregivers), every person whose spouse works days at a civilian job who doesn't want to work shift (so their kids aren't being raised by caregivers), every person who's married to a shift-worker who doesn't want to work shift (so their kids aren't being raised by caregivers), because the ONLY people you'd have left to work shifts -- are the ones who ARE NOT asking for the CF to make special allowances for them based upon their own personal choices. 

The troops who you accomodate (ie most of them) would love the hell out of you. The troops that CAN and DO do their jobs would hate you. Your Sqn would suffer because you would have, in fact, become a willing babysitter for personnel effected by their own actions. Further, your CoC would probably fire your ass because your Sqn could not perform it's essential tasks and because the release rate you caused with the troops who are able, willing and who do do the jobs required of them (ie shifts) are fed up with the babysitting service that you are providing to others while they get tagged with all the shitty tasks and shiftwork etc etc.

It's all up to you.


----------



## armyvern (3 Nov 2007)

Kirsten Luomala said:
			
		

> I have worked with training bases, army bases and the airforce.  I have found the army to be the best at looking after their soldiers and their welfare.
> Just my 2 cents worth
> Kirsten



And, having the same background here ... I'll back you up on this observation. You wouldn't believe the shit I've seen happen in the Army in attempts to look after their soldiers and their families. It happens in the other enviornments too, but I once recall thinking to myself while posted to an AF base -- these AF types are still looking it up in the books and the Army would have had this family gone on an emergency move, and BBQing in the new backyard two weeks ago already.


----------



## Jammer (3 Nov 2007)

The young guy could also go the MO or Padre...I'm sure we've all seen that as well.
Cry me a frickin' river already. 
I'm on IR in Pet, going over to Kandahar for a fourth time in four years, I see my family only on weekends when I'm not in the field (for the last 18 years).
I asked my CM for a static posting after TF 3-06, he obviously didn't hear my plea.
He was concerned about filling posns for TF 3-08.........that's all!
So much for the one tour in Afghanistan theory.
However...there is a silver lining...my RV will be paid for.
My two cents.


----------



## armyvern (3 Nov 2007)

Jammer said:
			
		

> The young guy could also go the MO or Padre...I'm sure we've all seen that as well.
> Cry me a frickin' river already.
> I'm on IR in Pet, going over to Kandahar for a fourth time in four years, I see my family only on weekends when I'm not in the field (for the last 18 years).
> I asked my CM for a static posting after TF 3-06, he obviously didn't hear my plea.
> ...



I hope it's a big honking RV too!!  

There's also silver lining in that you are, at least, IR in a spot which is a mere 2.5-3 drive from your family and so you get to see them on the weekends -- hopefully enjoying that RV.

I watched my brother (PPCLI) and my sister-in-law (fellow Sup Tech) go through 4 years of IR on opposite sides of the nation, No weekend visits there. Her working shift work for 2 years of this time period -- with 4 rambunctious children at home with caregivers while she worked -- all red-headed children at that!! _Giddy-up _ says I.  ;D (And, of course, when I visited -- I always whispered really nice tricks things to the kids and gave them hints about cool things to do to mommy to drive her insane!!  >)

They survived, the kids (most importantly) lived to tell about it and turned out perfectly _normal_. commo_dudes family will too.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (3 Nov 2007)

Jammer said:
			
		

> The young guy could also go the MO or Padre...I'm sure we've all seen that as well.
> Cry me a frickin' river already.
> I'm on IR in Pet, going over to Kandahar for a fourth time in four years, I see my family only on weekends when I'm not in the field (for the last 18 years).
> I asked my CM for a static posting after TF 3-06, he obviously didn't hear my plea.
> ...



All investigations for Contingency Cost Moves or Accomodation for family matters are done by the Social Workers not the MO or the Padre. People usually start with the Padre in order to get an idea whether they have a righteous cause and then they are referred to Social Work or "Mental Health Department" as they call themselves now. 
I can assure you that I have often told people that they don't have a case in my opinion that is more deserving of accomodation than those who will have to take up the slack. I remember a particular person being very angry at me when, after nine years in the Navy he had managed to miss all major deployments and never done work ups (because his wife was always calling to get him landed), I suggested he get out and look for a job where he could be home every night. His CoC was totally fed up with him and his co-workers were ready to lynch him. 
People who come to see the Padre are not always looking to skate out of work though as you suggest. I've got a pretty finely tuned radar for those who are and they don't manage to stay in my office long enough to warm the chair.


----------



## SupersonicMax (3 Nov 2007)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> And one day, when you are _actually_ leading (perhaps even a sqn !!), you'll learn NOT to fly off on a rant before you have all the facts in your little arsenal of explosives.
> 
> Commo-dude only stated the outcome of his wife's memorandum and the WOs final words to her. But, he failed to point out, in his original post, some pretty important facts. That's why, as you learn to be a "leader", WOs like myself will tell you (over & over & over again) --- ask questions!! I did that via PM ... and it worked for me.
> 
> ...



Vern, you don't know me, don't judge me.  And I'll do the same.  I have a tremendous amount of respect for NCMs/NCOs.  My point is pass the memo along to the person it is addressed to, with your recommendations.  My rant was mainly because he offered her LWOP but yet, can't spare her for anything.  I understand now the reason why.  But I still think that the military could make a little more effort than say "take LWOP" and leave someone (a dedicated member) without a salary for 6 months because her husband is serving overseas.  Why not transfer her to an other unit (which could use her, it seems every unit is short those days) temporarely so the unit can employ a B class personnel?  I might not understand the full extent of things, but I sure believe the miliary could do a little more than say "No" at first sight.

I'm a hard worker and I agree to take the hit sometimes (well, I've seen my spouse/girlfriend 4 days in the last 7 months.  I'm on IR in Moose Jaw), but I expect the military to help me out when I need it, because I sure do whatever I can for the military, often to the detriment of my spouse or myself)

Max


----------



## armyvern (4 Nov 2007)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Vern, you don't know me, don't judge me.  And I'll do the same.  I have a tremendous amount of respect for NCMs/NCOs.  My point is pass the memo along to the person it is addressed to, with your recommendations.  My rant was mainly because he offered her LWOP but yet, can't spare her for anything.  I understand now the reason why.
> Max



Tasting your own medicine isn't so nice is it? You certainly judged both the Army and the WOs (ie the CoC) in your post -- without knowing the facts. You didn't ask the questions -- And, you got called on it.

One day you'll learn to do that before flying off on a rant just like I stated. That's not judging you -- that's just part of the learning process in this big family we call the CF. 

BTW ... they're hard air trades, just so you know.


----------



## SupersonicMax (4 Nov 2007)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Tasting your own medicine isn't so nice is it? You certainly judged both the Army and the WOs (ie the CoC) in your post -- without knowing the facts. You didn't ask the questions -- And, you got called on it.
> 
> One day you'll learn to do that before flying off on a rant just like I stated. That's not judging you -- that's just part of the learning process in this big family we call the CF.
> 
> BTW ... they're hard air trades, just so you know.



During the first 5 years of my CF career, I've been "lead" by army officer/NCOs.  They didn't treat me nearly as good as the Air Force is doing now.  I think I'm in a position to make that statement.

I never, at any point, judge the WO.

Max


----------



## armyvern (4 Nov 2007)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> During the first 5 years of my CF career, I've been "lead" by army officer/NCOs.  They didn't treat me nearly as good as the Air Force is doing now.  I think I'm in a position to make that statement.
> 
> I never, at any point, judge the WO.
> 
> Max



That's good. I'm glad to hear the Air Force is treating you well. They don't seem to be doing so well for the couple below that you were ranting about though eh? That rant where you had to get your little dig in about the Army ... and blast the WO for not giving a shit about the troops. Erroneuosly, I might add. Although commo_dude did mention in his PM that he noticed they had made the same accomodations for the senior ranks at that Unit. I did explain to him why that could be.


Your crap postings where you constantly manage to get in little digs about the Army are getting rather tiresome.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (4 Nov 2007)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> But I still think that the military could make a little more effort than say "take LWOP" and leave someone (a dedicated member) without a salary for 6 months because her husband is serving overseas.



.....and someday when you are mature enough for a family you will discover they are not just little inconveniences to your earning potential.
I took a 12 year "hit" [and would do it all again]because those young un's, that were our choice to bring into this world, were waaay more important than a second salary.

Knowing she will still have a job to come back too is just a bonus, IMO.


----------



## KevinB (4 Nov 2007)

CSA 105


----------



## geo (4 Nov 2007)

+1 CSA


----------



## SupersonicMax (5 Nov 2007)

CSA, did I ever talk about my experience at RMC and the times I've been leading at RMC?   I don't think so, I was referring to how our officers and NCMs/NCOs were taking care of us and working for us.  

I don't see where I talked about how RMC was the best thing in the world.  If you knew me, you would know that my opinion of RMC isn't _that_ great.  Yet, 2 of your "arguments" are based on the fact that I put RMC as the best thing in the world and the fact that RMC grads are special, which is completely wrong.

I will judge people when I *know* them well enough to judge them.  

I still stand behind the fact that the military could be more grateful to service couple and could try more to accomodate them in situation like the original poster described.

Max


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (5 Nov 2007)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> I still stand behind the fact that the military could be more grateful to service couple and could try more to accomodate them in situation like the original poster described.



Yup, until, *maybe*, someday its you being in charge of something/someone and getting told to make it work.

Until then...............................


----------



## armyvern (5 Nov 2007)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> CSA, did I ever talk about my experience at RMC and the times I've been leading at RMC?   I don't think so, I was referring to how our officers and NCMs/NCOs were taking care of us and working for us.
> 
> I don't see where I talked about how RMC was the best thing in the world.  If you knew me, you would know that my opinion of RMC isn't _that_ great.  Yet, 2 of your "arguments" are based on the fact that I put RMC as the best thing in the world and the fact that RMC grads are special, which is completely wrong.
> 
> ...



I think it was this remark by you:



			
				SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> *During the first 5 years of my CF career, I've been "lead" by army officer/NCOs.  * They didn't treat me nearly as good as the Air Force is doing now.  I think I'm in a position to make that statement.
> 
> I never, at any point, judge the WO.
> 
> Max



First 4 years of your career was at RMC was it not?? Just checking. BTW ... RMC is not Army. Glad to hear your year and a bit with the Air Force undergoing training is going better for you than your time in Uni taking courses and your time in any other Schools undergoing training.

BTW -- it's "led" by Army officer/NCOs vice "lead."


----------



## scoutfinch (5 Nov 2007)

Max:

I don't want to join the dog pile that you have invited; however, I suggest that you step back for a minute and realize that the very solid advice that you are being provided is coming from officers and Sr NCO's that have 3 or 4 times the experience of you and I added together as junior officers. 

There is nothing wrong with admitting a mistake.  That being said, there is something terribly wrong with not learning from a mistake or failing to acknowledge one.  Continuing to argue 'how right' you were only makes you look foolish and sets a very poor example as a junior leader.

For what it is worth....


----------



## SupersonicMax (5 Nov 2007)

Vern:  Thanks for the correction (led vs lead).  I stopped for a few seconds to think about the right way to spell it.  My first 4 were indeed at RMC.  I know it's not the army, but it was led () by (mostly) army officers and NCOs/NCMs.  It just left a very bad aftertaste

Madeleine:  can you tell me what's wrong with having a different opinion?  I didn't know that having different opinions is wrong...

Max


----------



## George Wallace (5 Nov 2007)

If I may add:



			
				SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> I don't see where I talked about how RMC was the best thing in the world.  If you knew me, you would know that my opinion of .........
> 
> I will judge people when I *know* them well enough to judge them.
> 
> Max



Max

With the number of and posting style exhibited in your posts, we do have a fairly good knowledge of who you are.  We don't have to necessarily have to have a formal face to face and physical shaking of hands, hugs and kisses, etc. to develop a fairly knowledgeable inkling as to who you are.  Your discourse on this site is quite enough for that.


----------



## scoutfinch (5 Nov 2007)

Max:

I don't think there is a problem with having a differing opinion; however, there is something wrong when you continue to maintain the 'rightness' of your differing opinion in the face of years of experience telling you to the contrary.

At the end of the day, just because it is your opinion doesn't mean it is right.  And, as a junior officer, I would spend some time thinking of the counsel provided by senior serving members to see if I need to reconsider the validity of my own opinion in light of the advice provided by others.  If I can honestly say at the end of my reflection that my opinion remains the same, then so be it.  But to stubbornly cling to an opinion simply because it was mine seems foolhardy for a young leader.  I cringe to think of the potential for disaster should junior officers operate like this in an operational environment.

Maybe I am wrong -- I don't pretend to have all the answers.  That being said, I would rather admit that I made a mistake and learn from the experience of others than to march stubbornly down my own path, perhaps leading people to a similar demise simply because I didn't have the stones to say I was wrong.


----------



## muskrat89 (5 Nov 2007)

Anyway, I think the original question has been answered, and is also being addressed via PM. If anyone has any further advice for Max or anyone else, PM sounds good for that too.

Locked. If someone has something substantive to contribute, PM a Mod. Thanks.

Army.ca Staff


----------

