# Rations, Meal Halls ect... Merged



## X-mo-1979 (12 Jan 2008)

Quick question reference meal claims.

Been working 7h00-17h30 for the past week through the weekend and onward for the next little while.
Now the problem lies we have stayed till 19h00 without supper on one occasion and it is also a 30-40 minute bus drive back to base.

The night we stayed till 19h00 meal claims were made out for only living in personnel.Shouldn't everyone get the claim?

As well WHEN does the meal claim kick into action.Pretty well every night we get back on base around 18H15 or so.

Just wondering if someone can give me a strait answer on it/where to find the reference..Just trying to make sure my troops are not getting scammed out of money,and I have zip for time to look into it between working like a dog and trying to spend a hour with my family before I deploy.

Also when does the "clock" stop?At the work place a half hr bus ride away?Or when the bus gets us back to base?

Thank you very much,
Ill check back later


----------



## George Wallace (12 Jan 2008)

I think that what you are seeing is a "reimbursement of funds" for the Living-in pers.  What you 'Living out' guys have to do is submit an M Tech (Meal Claim) through the OR for your meals.  I think it is based on the TD rates for meals, but am not sure.  It is a petty cash account that the OR administers for such incidentals that happen.  You will, of course, have to have receipts in some cases.  You also sign an acquitance roll when you are paid.


----------



## Roy Harding (12 Jan 2008)

I take it that you weren't fed - a box lunch or whatever.

An MTEC claim (Minor Travel Expense Claim) is meant to reimburse you for funds ACTUALLY spent due to the exigencies of the service.

If you had to work until 1800, then went home and had a late supper - you didn't expend funds beyond what you normally would.  On the OTHER hand, if you ordered pizza or chinese or whatever whilst on duty, you could be reimbursed (granting that a meal - box lunch, mess chit, whatever, wasn't made available to you).  

But in MY world - you'd need a receipt.  MTEC isn't a compensation fund for inconvenience - it's a compensation fund for money actually spent due to the exigencies of the service.

Edit - typo


----------



## X-mo-1979 (12 Jan 2008)

Ok guys thanks for the response.

For some reason I thought that after 18h00 who ever was in charge had to summit a meal claim for the group.

No box lunches,haybox,meal chit's,dirty rocks to lick for nutrients were provided.

Every night I came home and ate supper.Most times by the time I got it ready 20h00.

Was there a time during the day when the MTEC come into effect?

Not a fun task by any means.I'm slightly bitter and twisted,however someones gotta do it.

Just looking to put cash in the boys pockets if they were entilted.

Do you guys happen to know where this stuff is written?Provide a link?

cheers.


----------



## George Wallace (12 Jan 2008)

In CFAO 36-21  ACCOUNTING FOR RATION ENTITLEMENT


ANNEX G -- CASUAL MEALS AND REPAYMENT MEALSSECTION 1 -- CASUAL MEALS
1.     For the purposes of Section 1 of this annex, "casual meal" means:
     a.   a meal provided to a living-out member from public rations under
          paragraph 4y of 36-14.

     b.   a meal provided to a living-out member from public rations under
          paragraph 4w of 36-14; or

     c.   a meal provided from public rations to a living-in member as a
          result of ship/shore duty as prescribed in paragraph 4 below.

2.     Except as indicated in paragraph 3 below, a Casual Meal Authorization
form (Appendix 1) shall be prepared to document and approve the entitlement
to a casual meal.  The form shall be prepared in single copy and, after use
by the individual, shall be forwarded daily by the DND food services
facility to the base or unit orderly room for incorporation in the ration
entitlement.

3.     Where a casual meal is provided in respect of a military duty that is
published in Routine Orders (eg, orderly officer), a Casual Meal
Authorization form is not required.

4.     When a person on ration strength proceeds on duty from a ship to a
shore establishment, or to another ship, over a meal period, the executive
officer may approve a casual meal authorization for the meal or meals
taken. Similarly, a living-in person of a shore establishment may be
authorized a casual meal or meals when on duty in a ship over a meal
period.  The ration entitlement of the parent ship or establishment shall
not be adjusted for such casual meals when the period of duty is for 24
hours or less.

=======================================================

ANNEX G, APPENDIX 1 -- CANADIAN FORCES CASUAL MEAL AUTHORIZATION
This image is in the process of being rescannedClick Image To Get Expanded View

INSTRUCTIONS (numbers correspond to circled numbers above)

1.     Insert SN, rank and name of person.  If a group is authorized meals,
insert "as per attached list".

2.     Insert date on which meal(s) is/are to be taken.

3.     Explain briefly the reason for the free casual meal(s).

4.     Insert person's base, unit, section, company, branch, etc.

5.     Signature and rank of authorizing officer.

===================================================


----------



## Roy Harding (12 Jan 2008)

X-mo-1979 said:
			
		

> Ok guys thanks for the response.
> 
> For some reason I thought that after 18h00 who ever was in charge had to summit a meal claim for the group.
> 
> ...



Keep in mind that I'm a few years out of date - you'd be better off to speak to your Chief Clerk on this.

From my (outdated) point of view, however - meal reimbursement is exactly that - a reimbursement for funds spent - NOT a payment in lieu, nor a compensation for having missed a meal.  This caused MUCH friction between aircrew and myself when I was CC of an operational (SAR) squadron - and was never settled to my satisfaction.

Talk to your Chief Clerk - find out what the local rules are (in my experience they could vary from place to place, from CO to CO, and from CC to CC).


----------



## harry8422 (12 Jan 2008)

hey , X-mo-1979  

I am on the same tasking as yourself and was just about to research the same subject but you beat me to it.


----------



## X-mo-1979 (12 Jan 2008)

Thanks George thats what I was lookin for.

Yeah roy it's a tasking outside my chain.And working from 5h30 till dark don't leave much time for me to swing into work to see the clerk.

thanks again.

Harry8422,I'll try and look after ya. ;D


----------



## armyvern (12 Jan 2008)

At my last Unit, here's how it went (we often worked weekends etc, expectedly & unexpectedly).

When we needed to work nights expectedly ... I had the Supply guys arrange for food delivery for the supper meal period as that was over & above the "normal" work day. Pers (living out ... are expected to provide their own lunch if not travelling). We bore the costs of providing that meal for the pers working over the CF "supper" hour.

For "unexpected" work over the supper hour, when Sup was not able to arrange for "take out" for everyone, pers who worked were authorized a general allowance claim by me if they were not dismissed from the workplace prior to 1830 hours (which is the "end" of the supper hour) and thus could not eat their supper meal during the CFs official "timings" for it. 

MTEC was not applicable as members did not have receipts nor were they travelling, but entitlement was deemed to have existed as work requirements prevented them from obtaining or eating their meal during the CFs recognized timing for that meal, and that their performance of duty to the CF caused that missed timing.


----------



## beach_bum (12 Jan 2008)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> Keep in mind that I'm a few years out of date - you'd be better off to speak to your Chief Clerk on this.
> 
> From my (outdated) point of view, however - meal reimbursement is exactly that - a reimbursement for funds spent - NOT a payment in lieu, nor a compensation for having missed a meal.  This caused MUCH friction between aircrew and myself when I was CC of an operational (SAR) squadron - and was never settled to my satisfaction.
> 
> Talk to your Chief Clerk - find out what the local rules are (in my experience they could vary from place to place, from CO to CO, and from CC to CC).



These are the rules we have.  Pers are only reimbursed money spent out of their own pocket.  If they didn't spend anything (if in the local geographical region a receipt must be provided) they don't get reimbursed.


----------



## Roy Harding (13 Jan 2008)

X-mo-1979 said:
			
		

> Thanks George thats what I was lookin for.
> 
> Yeah roy it's a tasking outside my chain.And working from 5h30 till dark don't leave much time for me to swing into work to see the clerk.
> 
> ...



Send an email to him/her (your CC).  That works too.


----------



## Franko (13 Jan 2008)

X-mo-1979 said:
			
		

> Been working 7h00-17h30 for the past week through the weekend and onward for the next little while.
> Now the problem lies we have stayed till 19h00 without supper on one occasion and it is also a 30-40 minute bus drive back to base.



If you are working over the supper hour well past the 1800 cut off time the organization that is in charge of you should be feeding you and your troops, be it box lunches or haybox meals.

If they aren't, lodge a complaint through the CoC, the work party and at your unit who tasked you, pronto.

It would seem that this is a short sight on their part and is inexcusable IMHO.

My 0.02 Duram worth.

Regards


----------



## armyvern (13 Jan 2008)

Recce By Death said:
			
		

> If you are working over the supper hour well past the 1800 cut off time the organization that is in charge of you should be feeding you and your troops, be it box lunches or haybox meals.
> 
> If they aren't, lodge a complaint through the CoC, the work party and at your unit who tasked you, pronto.
> 
> ...



I agree.

They either feed them via alternate means (box lunch etc), or the member is entitled to claim them. 

Being allowed your meals is an entitlement, and when you can not have them within a reasonable time period (as set out for the CF official meal timings) due to performance of military duties -- they *are* compensatable (and that's exactly why the living-in guys got reimbursed -- because they had missed the meal hour at the Mess).


----------



## Zoomie (14 Jan 2008)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> This caused MUCH friction between aircrew and myself when I was CC of an operational (SAR) squadron - and was never settled to my satisfaction.



No more friction here Roy 

MTECs without receipt are required for operational crew members when they eat away from the Wing (i.e. Chilliwack for lunch).

When operational crews stay on the Wing over lunch - they all go over together to the Mess Hall and eat to their heart's (and waistlines) content.

If our day shift goes late and we land past 1830hrs - we fill out an MTEC again, but this time we require a receipt and only get reimbursed for the funds expended.  We had a CC a couple of years ago who would vet each itemized receipt and question the member about whether he really ate all the food.   "Did you really eat a whole bucket of chicken?"
Our current SOR staff are more big picture and reimburse up to the maximum allowable (TD lrate).


----------



## PO2FinClk (14 Jan 2008)

CFTDTI 5.10 Travel within Headquarters Area – No overnight stay]
5.10	Meals (Within HQ Area)
(1)	Meal expenses incurred within the HQ area shall not normally be reimbursed.  Each unit must provide a lunch break approximately midway through the regular work period or shift to enable each member to obtain a meal at their own expense.
(2)	[b]If the CO considers meal expenses during normal working hours as reasonable and justifiable said:


> MTEC was not applicable as members did not have receipts nor were they travelling, but entitlement was deemed to have existed as work requirements prevented them from obtaining or eating their meal during the CFs recognized timing for that meal, and that their performance of duty to the CF caused that missed timing.


MTEC is but the claim form used and not the direction or policy authorizing any reimbursement. Rather the TB Travel Directive of which DND/CF have enhanced through CBI's, CFAO's and more to the point the CFTDTI's are the authorities to effect any reimbursement of the sort. The 2 quotes above can apply to pers within this topic as I do not know if they were working outside the HQ Area or not.

As a rule of thumb, anything within the local area (HQ Area) requires receipts and would suspect that Roy can back me up on that. You have been reimbursed, however do not be surprised if it gets picked up during an audit and have to repay the funds (if not recovered from your pay). I have seen this happen time and time again. Regardless of the perceived “entitlement”, without receipts it did not exist as only actual and reasonable expenses incurred can be reimbursed through the use receipts to no greater amount then provided by the Treasury Board.

Not trying to start a debate, nor will I participate in, of what it should or should not be but am rather only advising you of the regulations to this effect.


----------



## armyvern (14 Jan 2008)

Edited: PM in.


----------



## Bintheredunthat (14 Feb 2008)

Not wanting to start a new thread as this may be somewhat related.

I always thought that for TD - breakfast if provided (at a hotel) was not to be claimed only if it was a full or hot breakfast.  It goes back to one of those things as having always done it this way.  What I'm trying to understand is why, when I'm given a coffee and a muffin at a hotel, would this meal be considered anything even close to the equivalent to a normal sized meal.

I've taken a look through the CFTDIs but couldn't read much of it for this particular situation.  I've spoken to different members of the Clerk staff and the idea seems to be split as to what is correct.

Can anyone provide opinion as to which it should be?

Bin


----------



## aesop081 (14 Feb 2008)

Bintheredunthat-Muzzled said:
			
		

> What I'm trying to understand is why, when I'm given a coffee and a muffin at a hotel, would this meal be considered anything even close to the equivalent to a normal sized meal.



Its not. I do this alot.....and i mean ALOT and not once is the breakfast at the hotel ( continental type) considered to replace your breakfast per diem. Your OR and CoC should be on top of that.


----------



## Bintheredunthat (14 Feb 2008)

Ah ha - another person that does it - but where is the black & white with justification?  Unfortunately, this is what I need to plead my case.

Reason I ask, is because the OR is the culprit all of a sudden for saying - "Nope" because of however it is that they read TD info.

I'd be happy to agree with whomever can really point me in the right direction.   ;D  Until then, a coffee & a muffin is costing me $13.45.

BTW - what do I get for my 100th post?

Bin


----------



## George Wallace (14 Feb 2008)

Bintheredunthat-Muzzled said:
			
		

> BTW - what do I get for my 100th post?
> 
> Bin



We will try to promise not to wack your peepee for your next five posts.


 ;D


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (14 Feb 2008)

There is somewhere, perhaps in the real of health promotion, or food service or whereever what defines a meal, a former CC looked this up for me once and there is somewhere where it shows that a continental breakfast does not meet the minimun nutritional requirements for CF Mbrs, I'll try to dig it up as I'm sure I kept it handy for circumstances like this.


----------



## armyvern (14 Feb 2008)

DCBA ...

Section 7: (Travel in Canada/Continental USA – Overnight stay --- page 21 ---)



> 7.10	Meals
> 
> (1)	A member is entitled to reimbursement for the applicable meal allowance rates as set out in Appendix C of the following Treasury Board website, http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/hrpubs/TBM_113/td-dv_e.asp, for each breakfast, lunch and dinner while on TD.  Members shall only claim for those meals that they were not provided.  A member is not entitled to reimbursement with respect to a meal that is provided by a third party or other government agency.
> 
> ...



If I were you, I'd be making the argument that IAW Canada's Food Guide to Healthy Eating (The CF standard for meal ratio & nutrition), a muffin does NOT constitute a meal, but is realisitcly a "snack."

Much in the bit I've quoted here again:



> If it is determined that no meals were provided on a flight, a member is entitled to claim the per diem meal rate without receipts. *However, where a member considers that a meal was insufficient, receipts are required for the alternate meal consumed.  Substantiation must be provided to the approving authority before the meal expense is reimbursed.  Snacks, i.e., pretzels, peanuts and chips do not constitute a meal.*



Change to:



> If it is determined that no meals were provided on a flightin the Hotel, a member is *entitled* *to * claim *the per diem meal rate without receipts.*





> Snacks, i.e., pretzels, peanuts and chips muffins *do not constitute a meal*



Ergo, you are entitled to the per diem ... without receipts.


----------



## armyvern (14 Feb 2008)

And further:

http://www.forces.gc.ca/admmat/j4mat-dglog/dlogsvs/manual/final/A-85-269-001_FP-001/269Chapter6_e.doc

Chapter 6 from the Food Services’ Direction & Guidance Manual specificly sets out what kitchens must supply to constitute an acceptable standard of meal:

Section 1, Art 602 (page 2):



> 602. 	Food Services’ Role in Maintaining Nutritional Health
> 
> 2.	CF Food Svcs Operations shall provide food choices that enable diners to meet normal nutritional requirements as expressed by Health Canada in Canada Food's Guide to Healthy Eating.  CF food services personnel should also understand:
> 
> ...


----------



## Nfld Sapper (15 Feb 2008)

I  just bring receipts to my OR and let them deal with it   ;D


----------



## armyvern (15 Feb 2008)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> I  just bring receipts to my OR and let them deal with it   ;D



Until your OR tells you that little pot of 1/2 a cup of coffee and one meal constitutes "breakfast."

Then you'd be here wouldn't you?  >


----------



## aesop081 (15 Feb 2008)

If you are on Per Diem,why are you bothering with receipts ?


----------



## Nfld Sapper (15 Feb 2008)

ArmyVern (Female type) said:
			
		

> Until your OR tells you that little pot of 1/2 a cup of coffee and one meal constitutes "breakfast."
> 
> Then you'd be here wouldn't you?  >



True but my OR is so switched on that most time I don't even need receipts if I am traveling over a meal hour.


----------



## armyvern (15 Feb 2008)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> True but my OR is so switched on that most time I don't even need receipts if I am traveling over a meal hour.



Dude ... switched on?? Most of the time you don't need receipts over the meal hour if you're travelling?? 

Read the below link from DCBA from me ... you'll clearly see that you never need receipts if you are travelling over the meal hour on TD. (Unless, of course, you travelled via some mode of transport which included meals as part of the price, but you found that "meal" insufficient -- then you'd need a receipt for the "meal" you did buy to supplement theirs).

Work on your OR a 'lil bit more ...  >

 :-*


----------



## Nfld Sapper (15 Feb 2008)

:nana:


----------



## TN2IC (15 Feb 2008)

Bring your own food...

Collect the MTEC's..

Trucker life for me....  ;D


----------



## maniac779 (28 Jan 2010)

Is there any guidance on what constitutes a meal that can be claimed versus one that can't?

I realize that there is basic criteria of provided for by the crown (Non-claimable) vice not provided for by the crown (generally claimable), but is there any amplification on this?

For example, if you are on TD and the hotel provides breakfast for all its guests, does this count as a provided for meal, and thus not claimable? What if you elected to eat the provided for meal from the hotel? Should you not claim breakfast in this case, as you were not out of pocket any additional funds?


----------



## George Wallace (28 Jan 2010)

While you are on TD, unless you are eating in a Mess, you will be entitled to three meals and incidentals per day.  The person to ask, is the person who does up you Claim and knows exactly where you are being lodged and what you will be entitled to.


----------



## Cansky (28 Jan 2010)

maniac779 said:
			
		

> Is there any guidance on what constitutes a meal that can be claimed versus one that can't?
> 
> I realize that there is basic criteria of provided for by the crown (Non-claimable) vice not provided for by the crown (generally claimable), but is there any amplification on this?
> 
> For example, if you are on TD and the hotel provides breakfast for all its guests, does this count as a provided for meal, and thus not claimable? What if you elected to eat the provided for meal from the hotel? Should you not claim breakfast in this case, as you were not out of pocket any additional funds?



In regard to the example provided, if the hotel provides breakfast then you won't get to claim or get advanced for that meal but would still get lunch and dinner claimed or advanced.


----------



## PMedMoe (28 Jan 2010)

Kirsten Luomala said:
			
		

> In regard to the example provided, if the hotel provides breakfast then you won't get to claim or get advanced for that meal but would still get lunch and dinner claimed or advanced.


Actually, if it doesn't show up on the hotel bill and it's not known that the hotel provides a breakfast, you can indeed claim that meal.  Is it ethical?  I'll leave that up to the individual.  Not to mention, some hotel "breakfasts" are a muffin and a coffee.   :


----------



## LineJumper (28 Jan 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Actually, if it doesn't show up on the hotel bill and it's not known that the hotel provides a breakfast, you can indeed claim that meal.  Is it ethical?  I'll leave that up to the individual.  Not to mention, some hotel "breakfasts" are a muffin and a coffee.   :



That's only if any muffins or non-decaf coffee is left when you get there


----------



## PMedMoe (28 Jan 2010)

Here's a "for instance".  When I came back from Afghanistan in December, we had an overnight in Köln, Germany.  I didn't think that breakfast was included (looking at the hotel info book in the room, it stated in was €23), so I didn't go to breakfast at the hotel but got something once we arrived at the airport.  Turns out breakfast _was_ included.  Is it wrong of me to claim that meal??


----------



## the 48th regulator (28 Jan 2010)

Does DND fall under the treasury board, in this instance, with regarding travel.  I am not sure, however, this is a good link I use as a Public Service Employee;

http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/hrpubs/tbm_113/td-dv-eng.asp

In particular;

http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/hrpubs/tbm_113/td-dv01-eng.asp#Toc190491135


This is stated several times;

A meal allowance shall not be paid to a traveller with respect to a meal that is provided. In exceptional situations where a traveller has incurred out-of-pocket expenses to supplement meals provided, the actual incurred costs may be reimbursed, based on receipts, up to the applicable meal allowance.

You are best to do your due diligence, and ask at check in, because I can bet my bottom dollar there will be someone out there that will come across your claim and nail you if you lie.  Maybe not the first, or second time, but there will be a time.

No sense in burning yourself for a lousy 15 bucks.

dileas

tess


----------



## Biohazardxj (28 Jan 2010)

Meal and mileage rates for DND are set by the Treasury Board.  As stated above, If breakfast is provided by the hotel, you cannot claim it.  However, if you feel that the meal was insufficient, such as a muffin and coffee, you can buy more and, with receipt, claim it up to the maximum TB rate for that meal.  You may also be required to sign a statement to the fact that the provided hotel meal was not acceptable.


----------



## PMedMoe (28 Jan 2010)

The claims section accepted it.  IMHO, it's better than the people who did eat breakfast and still claimed the meal.


----------



## the 48th regulator (28 Jan 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> The claims section accepted it.  IMHO, it's better than the people who did eat breakfast and still claimed the meal.



How much were you compensated, if you do not mind me asking?

dileas

tess


----------



## PMedMoe (28 Jan 2010)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> How much were you compensated, if you do not mind me asking?


The normal meal rate, whatever that is.  

At any rate, this is getting slightly off topic.


----------



## the 48th regulator (28 Jan 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> The normal meal rate, whatever that is.
> 
> At any rate, this is getting slightly off topic.




Oh no, no it's not.

Your in the medical field, How much does a field bandage cost?

Maybe Vern, can help, but what about one single Nato 5.56 round, a Battery for a radio, a litre of Chopper fuel....

I may be using the old "If a butterfly flaps it's wing" analogy, however, there is a reason to look at not scamming the system in that sense.

dileas

tess


----------



## exgunnertdo (28 Jan 2010)

2 more "for instances", both from our last move (administered by IRP, but still TB policy)

Our hotel included breakfast.  On the morning of our load, we were told to be at the house by 0800 to meet the truck.  We left our hotel room in plenty of time to have a reasonable breakfast with our two small children in the hotel breakfast room.  Just before we got there, an entire bus tour's worth of people had just sat down to eat - the place was packed, not a seat in the place.  We could wait for probably 20-30 minutes for a table to open up, and be late for our timing at the house, or drive through McDonald's, and eat sitting among the boxes in our already packed kitchen.  We did McD's, saved the receipts and it was allowed.  Mind you, the truck didn't show until nearly 11, but we were there by 0800, as instructed.

Hotel at destination - provided breakfast for one person per room.  Government rate, it's based on a business traveller, not a family.  We had two rooms, so two breakfasts, for our family of 4.  But the restaurant was not in any way kid friendly.  Full of business type folks, quietly reading their paper, working on laptops.  My kids were wired after a week of upheaval, excited cause we were getting to our new house, and I really didn't feel like spending the whole meal of time shushing them.   So we went somewhere else and said to ourselves that we would be fine if the IPR rep denied the meal.  She allowed it, with the receipt.


----------



## the 48th regulator (28 Jan 2010)

exgunnertdo said:
			
		

> 2 more "for instances", both from our last move (administered by IRP, but still TB policy)
> 
> Our hotel included breakfast.  On the morning of our load, we were told to be at the house by 0800 to meet the truck.  We left our hotel room in plenty of time to have a reasonable breakfast with our two small children in the hotel breakfast room.  Just before we got there, an entire bus tour's worth of people had just sat down to eat - the place was packed, not a seat in the place.  We could wait for probably 20-30 minutes for a table to open up, and be late for our timing at the house, or drive through McDonald's, and eat sitting among the boxes in our already packed kitchen.  We did McD's, saved the receipts and it was allowed.  Mind you, the truck didn't show until nearly 11, but we were there by 0800, as instructed.
> 
> Hotel at destination - provided breakfast for one person per room.  Government rate, it's based on a business traveller, not a family.  We had two rooms, so two breakfasts, for our family of 4.  But the restaurant was not in any way kid friendly.  Full of business type folks, quietly reading their paper, working on laptops.  My kids were wired after a week of upheaval, excited cause we were getting to our new house, and I really didn't feel like spending the whole meal of time shushing them.   So we went somewhere else and said to ourselves that we would be fine if the IPR rep denied the meal.  She allowed it, with the receipt.





			
				SGT-RMSCLK said:
			
		

> Meal and mileage rates for DND are set by the Treasury Board.  As stated above, If breakfast is provided by the hotel, you cannot claim it.  However, if you feel that the meal was insufficient, such as a muffin and coffee, you can buy more and, with receipt, claim it up to the maximum TB rate for that meal.  You may also be required to sign a statement to the fact that the provided hotel meal was not acceptable.




You made an effort, and did your due diligence, wouldn't you agree?  Had you been asked ,you would have been able to provide a reasonable statement, explaining the challenges.

Saying I did not know it was included, and I heard that it gave people a tummy ache, won't get you off;  That is what my point is through out the thread.

dileas

tess


----------



## PMedMoe (28 Jan 2010)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> I may be using the old "If a butterfly flaps it's wing" analogy, however, there is a reason to look at *not scamming the system* in that sense.


I never said anything about "scamming" the system.  I'll thank you for not putting words in my mouth.  It was an honest mistake and the claims section accepted it.  I got the full meal rate (not sure what the amount for breakfast is - $15.00?).  The people who ate breakfast at the hotel _and_ claimed it are scamming the system., IMO.


----------



## the 48th regulator (28 Jan 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> I never said anything about "scamming" the system.  I'll thank you for not putting words in my mouth.  It was an honest mistake and the claims section accepted it.  I got the full meal rate (not sure what the amount for breakfast is - $15.00?).  The people who ate breakfast at the hotel _and_ claimed it are scamming the system., IMO.



 :-\

I am not putting words in your mouth, they are my own.  I am standing here pointing at you with an accusatory (Dang Moe, can you imagine me saying such a big word...) finger.  You were allowed the claim because the claims people believed that you used your best judgment when you were spending Crown money.  Those people that ate and did the same as you are just as guilty.  It may seem a like a trivial point, and yes it may seem like an honest mistake.  However, it is not acceptable, nor is it legal in the sense of the Treasury Board. 








Moe, I am not "Picking" on you, but with the way that DND is slashing left, right, and centre, every dollar counts.  You passing the buck by saying that it was an honest mistake, and passing the blame to the claims people since they approved it, does not wash.  This is not something we should be promoting.

I still dig you though  :-*

dileas

tess


----------



## captloadie (29 Jan 2010)

In the OP example, just because it doesn't say so on the receipt doesn't mean it isn't included. Hotels often bury the cost of the breakfast in the nightly charge. The hotel in Koln, as it is with many European hotels, was a good example of how they have 2 different rates, one that includes breakfast and one that doesn't. They often don't indicate it on the receipt.

From a financial perspective, units will often try to book members into hotels that include breakfast it is normally cheaper than paying a night at a hotel and a separate breakfast. In Canada, breakfast entitlement is $13.50 I believe, no receipt required, but in many European cities, if it is not by receipt, it is much more (15-20 Euros). 

As an exfin guy, I never had a heart ache when someone brought in a receipt for a meal,  because he incurred a cost. It really burned me thoguh when guys did their best to screw the system and just pocket the cash.


----------



## PMedMoe (29 Jan 2010)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> I am not putting words in your mouth, they are my own.  I am standing here pointing at you with an *accusatory* (Dang Moe, can you imagine me saying such a big word...) finger.


 Good enough, and no, I can't.  Did you eat a bowl of alphabet soup?   



			
				the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Those people that ate and did the same as you are just as guilty.


I beg to differ.  I think they're _guiltier_ (more guilty?) as they claimed for a meal they had _already_ received, whereas I claimed for a meal that I _had_ to purchase.



			
				the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> However, it is not acceptable, nor is it legal in the sense of the Treasury Board.


Oh please, let's not _even_ go there.  Go check out the IR thread and see how much a public servant gets for rent compared to those of us in the CF.  What about all the politicians having their weekend travel home compensated for?  What about the RCMP who get high rate of mileage on their moves where we only get the low rate?  If you want to point accusatory fingers, why isn't everyone the same across the board if all of this is based on the Treasury Board??



			
				the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> This is not something we should be promoting.


I agree.  Really, my situation is _quite_ minor compared to others who have frauded the government out of _thousands_ of dollars and gotten away with it.  People who claim they drove for LTA and get XXX amount of dollars when in reality, they flew for less than half of what they received, comes to mind.   :



			
				the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> I still dig you though  :-*


I dig you, too, tess.   :-*


----------



## ballz (29 Jan 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> People who claim they drove for LTA and get XXX amount of dollars when in reality, they flew



** I never thought of that! Can't wait till next xmas (my next of kin live on other side of the country...)  Oh army.ca you've taught me so many great lessons. 

I kid, I kid... I never thought of that scheme but I have noticed other possible ones. I'm not sure how people can live with that. People die in this business because of a lack of funds...


----------



## Zoomie (31 Jan 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Go check out the IR thread and see how much a public servant gets for rent compared to those of us in the CF.  What about all the politicians having their weekend travel home compensated for?  What about the RCMP who get high rate of mileage on their moves where we only get the low rate?



Unless those public servants are governed under a different TB - the rental allowance for IR is the same in the CF.  Max allowable is $1090/month.

RegF members can have mileage compensated too - just needs to be organized.

RCMP and CF members have the exact same move package.  CF members get high rate for moving.

I spend quite a few days on the road on TD with my students.  We book our hotels and some of them provide a full breakfast.  The cost of a hotel that provides a breakfast and one that does not is not a huge difference.  If my students feel that they were adequately nourished by their meal, no claim is made for the breakfast.  When we stay in Calgary, we stop at Timmies on the way to the FBO - get our stuff and move on.  Claim is made for full breakfast amount - no receipts required.  Even if the hotel provides a full breakfast au gratis - if we decide that we are going somewhere else - we claim.  There is not a directive anywhere that states we must eat the provided food.


----------



## the 48th regulator (31 Jan 2010)

Zoomie said:
			
		

> There is not a directive anywhere that states we must eat the provided food.



I beg to differ;

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dgcb-dgras/ps/db-as/cft-ifc/index-eng.asp

Canadian Forces Temporary Duty Travel Instruction, 22 July 2007 (DOC Version, 459.50 KB)

Again, it is states;

Section - 6 - Travel Outside the Headquarters Area – No overnight stay
6.10	Meals

(1)	A member is entitled to be reimbursed the applicable meal allowance rates set out in Appendix C of the following Treasury Board website, http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/hrpubs/TBM_113/td-dv_e.asp, for each breakfast, lunch and dinner while on TD.  A meal allowance shall not be paid to a member with respect to a meal that is provided by a third party or other government agency.  Members shall only claim for those meals that they were not provided.

(2)	A member is entitled to be reimbursed the applicable meal allowance for each breakfast, lunch and dinner provided that:

a)	for breakfast, the member must depart from home on duty travel before 0630 hrs;

b)	for lunch, the member must be on travel status between 1130 hrs and 1300 hrs; and

c)	for dinner, the member must arrive at home after 1800 hrs.

(3)	A member who is on duty between 1900 hours and 0730 hours for four hours or greater is entitled to be reimbursed, with receipts, actual and reasonable expenses not exceeding the amount payable for a lunch, for a single night meal, when the CO considers that the purchase of the meal was necessary to ensure the proper performance of the duty.

(4)	Reimbursement of meals for shift workers shall be based on the meal sequence of breakfast, lunch and dinner in relation to the commencement of the CF member’s shift.


Section 7 – Travel in Canada/Continental USA – Overnight stay

7.10	Meals

(1)	A member is entitled to reimbursement for the applicable meal allowance rates as set out in Appendix C of the following Treasury Board website, http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/hrpubs/TBM_113/td-dv_e.asp, for each breakfast, lunch and dinner while on TD.  Members shall only claim for those meals that they were not provided.  A member is not entitled to reimbursement with respect to a meal that is provided by a third party or other government agency.

(2)	A member is entitled to reimbursement provided that:
a)	for breakfast, the member must depart from home on duty travel before 0630 hrs

b)	for lunch, the member must be on travel status between 1130 hrs and 1300 hrs; and

c)	for dinner, the member must arrive at home after 1800 hrs.

(3)	If it is determined that no meals were provided on a flight, a member is entitled to claim the per diem meal rate without receipts.  However, where a member considers that a meal was insufficient, receipts are required for the alternate meal consumed.  Substantiation must be provided to the approving authority before the meal expense is reimbursed.  Snacks, i.e., pretzels, peanuts and chips do not constitute a meal.

(4)	If a member declines a meal included in the travel or conference package and seeks reimbursement for an alternate meal, the member must provide written substantiation to the approving authority for refusal.

(5)	It is the member’s personal responsibility to provide advance notice to the airlines or other appropriate service providers, to ensure that their religious beliefs or dietary requirements can be accommodated.

(6)	For TD travel in the USA, the rate payable shall be in US funds.

(7)	In accordance with CFAOs 28-1 and 209-4 http://admfincs.mil.ca/admfincs/subjects/cfao/028-01_e.asp and http://admfincs.mil.ca/admfincs/subjects/cfao/209-04_e.asp, rations shall be utilized where available.  When a member is in US military quarters without cooking facilities and access to rations the member shall receive full per diem for the first thirty (30) days.  Thereafter a member is eligible for seventy-five per cent (75%) of meals and seventy-five per cent (75%) of incidentals.  Meals claimed while a member is provided free rations and quarters must be accompanied by a receipt as well as the rationale for not utilizing the rations.

(8)	If a member has no choice but to reside in commercial accommodations without cooking facilities for the duration of the duty travel, the member is entitled to the full per diem meal rates.  However, if the member selects to reside in private vice commercial accommodation, the member is entitled to the full per diem meal rates for the first thirty (30) days and seventy-five percent (75%) thereafter.

(9)	If a member occupies US military, corporate, government or school residences, apartment hotels or similar type accommodation with cooking facilities or non-commercial accommodation, the member is entitled to the full per diem meal rate for the initial thirty (30) days.  Thereafter, a member is entitled to be paid seventy five percent (75%) of the daily meal allowance for the remainder of the TD period.






Section 8 Overnight Stay outside of Canada

8.10	Meals

(1)	A member is entitled to the applicable foreign meal allowance rates for each breakfast, lunch and dinner while on TD as specified in the TB Daily Meal Rates at Locations Abroad, Appendix D, which is found at the following website, http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/hrpubs/TBM_113/td-dv_e.asp.  The TB meal rate is based on the usage of full commercial meal facilities.  However, if no meal allowance has been established for a given country or where sudden changes in currency exchange rates or high inflationary trends may invalidate the specified meal allowance, a member is entitled to be reimbursed actual and reasonable expenses, based on receipts.

(2)	Members shall only claim for those meals that they were not provided.  A member is not entitled to reimbursement with respect to a meal that is provided by a third party or other government agency or where the meal was included in the price of the accommodation, i.e., breakfast.

I am not trying to be facetious or anal, however there are rules in place.  Getting reimbursement for meals that were not entitled has being going on since the First Roman Centurion came up with the idea.

dileas

tess


----------



## Nfld Sapper (31 Jan 2010)

I just take all my receipts and let the OR staff figure it out....


----------



## armyvern (31 Jan 2010)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> I am not trying to be facetious or anal, however there are rules in place.  Getting reimbursement for meals that were not entitled has being going on since the First Roman Centurion came up with the idea.
> 
> dileas
> 
> tess



You're correct Tess,

A member should not, IAW regulations, be claiming a meal that was provided by a caterer, included in the price of the hotel etc. If the meal *was* provided - the only way that they should then be claiming is *with* a receipt *if* they believed that the meal was "insufficient." In that case, the full meal rate for meal "X" is not reimbursable, but only the *actual* cost of the meal as indicated on the receipt.

When I go to conferences & stay in hotels, the lunch meal is usually provided by a caterer via buffet or otherwise. I am not entitled to claim for lunch, nor do I. I once did file a claim, as the lunch provided was on a Friday ... mostly consisting of fish & no one could assure me that the other items (non-fish) provided by the caterer were not fish-contaminated --- I am allergic to fish. I bought my lunch from the hotel restaurant and submitted with my claim upon my return from the conference; I was reimbursed the exact dollar value of that meal - no more, no less. No problem.


----------



## PMedMoe (31 Jan 2010)

Zoomie said:
			
		

> Unless those public servants are governed under a different TB - the rental allowance for IR is the same in the CF.  Max allowable is $1090/month.



Really?  I get $1600/month for rent.  I'm pretty sure it varies by location.

My mistake, it wasn't PS but CBSA.  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/91767.0


----------



## Zoomie (31 Jan 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Really?  I get $1600/month for rent.  I'm pretty sure it varies by location.



Interesting - is that $1600 inclusive for rent and furnishings - or does it also include food?  We have quite a number of members out here at the school living on IR from Winnipeg.  They can submit receipts to a maximum of $1090/month to cover rent and furniture.  They get another $500-600 in other funds too.

Thanks for the reference Tess - conferences and all inclusive resorts aside, hotels that provide "breakfast" don't quite meet the requisites listed above.  If I could pay a lower night stay that was without breakfast included - then the reference would be valid.  Since this food is provided more as a marketing tool, the cost is not really covered by the accommodation cost.  That being said, if I eat the food in the hotel and it suffices - I do not claim breakfast.  If I decide that I would rather go to the Denny's across the street - that too is my prerogative.


----------



## PMedMoe (31 Jan 2010)

Zoomie said:
			
		

> Interesting - is that $1600 inclusive for rent and furnishings - or does it also include food?  We have quite a number of members out here at the school living on IR from Winnipeg.  They can submit receipts to a maximum of $1090/month to cover rent and furniture.  They get another $500-600 in other funds too.



$1600 for a furnished apartment, including utilities.  $100 for parking.  Add another $500-600 for food/separation allowance.  As I said, I believe the rates are different for each area.


----------



## armyvern (31 Jan 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> $1600 for a furnished apartment, including utilities.  $100 for parking.  Add another $500-600 for food/separation allowance.  As I said, I believe the rates are different for each area.



Correct - the maximum amount varies on location. I got a max of 1080/month in PEI for a furnished apartment. Mine only cost 1000, so I was only re-imbursed 1000. Wasn't reimbursed parking as it was provided free of charge. Add on to that 1000 whatever the going rate was then for high rate SA to pay for my food, cable etc


----------



## CountDC (1 Feb 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Actually, if it doesn't show up on the hotel bill and it's not known that the hotel provides a breakfast, you can indeed claim that meal.  Is it ethical?  I'll leave that up to the individual.  Not to mention, some hotel "breakfasts" are a muffin and a coffee.   :



Forget ethic shall we talk legal??

If you are provided a meal and then claim it you are committing fraud and yes there are some of us that checks on these things when you send us a claim for approval.

If it is just a muffin and coffee then fine, buy some bacon and eggs and claim it, put a note that breakfast provided was not satisfactory as it was just a muffin.

To claim a meal you must have purchased something.  The odd thing is that we do not force you to accept muffin and coffee as breakfast but that is all you have to purchase in order to claim it.


----------



## CountDC (1 Feb 2010)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Here's a "for instance".  When I came back from Afghanistan in December, we had an overnight in Köln, Germany.  I didn't think that breakfast was included (looking at the hotel info book in the room, it stated in was €23), so I didn't go to breakfast at the hotel but got something once we arrived at the airport.  Turns out breakfast _was_ included.  Is it wrong of me to claim that meal??



not wrong if you justify it so the approving authority knows all the facts.  submit it and include the explanation you just gave here.  Then the worse that will happen is they say no and you are out the money.


----------



## CountDC (1 Feb 2010)

Zoomie said:
			
		

> Interesting - is that $1600 inclusive for rent and furnishings - or does it also include food?  We have quite a number of members out here at the school living on IR from Winnipeg.  They can submit receipts to a maximum of $1090/month to cover rent and furniture.  They get another $500-600 in other funds too.
> 
> Thanks for the reference Tess - conferences and all inclusive resorts aside, hotels that provide "breakfast" don't quite meet the requisites listed above.  If I could pay a lower night stay that was without breakfast included - then the reference would be valid.  Since this food is provided more as a marketing tool, the cost is not really covered by the accommodation cost.  That being said, if I eat the food in the hotel and it suffices - I do not claim breakfast.  If I decide that I would rather go to the Denny's across the street - that too is my prerogative.



marketing tool or not if the hotel provides a meal then you are not entitled to claim one.  You can explain why the meal was not satisfactory but that does not make it automatically approved.  I have seen some accepted and also seen some rejected.  That you would rather eat at Denny's is your prerogative but it is also the prerogative of the person approving the claim to say no to paying it.

There are many misconceptions out there on claims simply because they have been allowed by some that don't know better or simply don't care (including clerks and log o's).  I have had several senior officers and aids look shocked when I ask them for their memo justifying the hotel they stayed in.  Cols and above can stay where ever they want and don't have to justify it - WRONG.

Please check the regulations and use them.  I'd rather not see the case of the Chief and Col that claimed $5 for taxis they didn't take.  At least the guys I caught for taxi fraud only got slaps on the wrist.


----------



## captloadie (2 Feb 2010)

CountDC said:
			
		

> To claim a meal you must have purchased something.  The odd thing is that we do not force you to accept muffin and coffee as breakfast but that is all you have to purchase in order to claim it.



This is so true. Timmies and a muffin is fine most of the time, accept when the hotel is providing it for free. 

I can remember when you actually sat down with a clerk to finalize a claim and when they asked if you stopped for a meal on the road they would nod their head to encourage you to say yes. Because if you said no, they couldn't reimburse you for it. As stated previously, too many members take the meal entitlement as a god given right to be handed money, not for what it is supposed to be: reimbursement for meals actually consumed.


----------



## PMedMoe (2 Feb 2010)

CountDC said:
			
		

> To claim a meal you must have purchased something.


Well, I _did_ purchase a meal.  As I said, I explained it to the clerk doing the claim and it was accepted.  I guess I should have asked the hotel at check-in but it never occurred to me as any hotel I have been in that provided breakfast as part of the cost have told me that breakfast was included and the times it was served.  I guess Germany's different.  Also, when looking at the hotel info card, it stated that breakfast cost €23, so I _assumed_ (yeah, yeah, I know) that it wasn't included.

Are we all happy now??


----------



## Avalon (2 Feb 2010)

Good Day,
I am currently working in Belgium on shifts(12hrs) and during the Christmas holidays I was tasked with 2 x 24 hrs shifts.  I've since put in a memo for supper and late night meals allowance but has been refused because I don't have receipts.  I work in a secure area alone and requires me to stay in my office and cannot leave the area for more than 10 mins.  There is no box lunches provided or mess and deliveries cannot be made on SHAPE.  I've been on the internet looking at policies and cannot seems to find anything that would support my request.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.  Thank you.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (2 Feb 2010)

This may help. 
I know it has been discussed before on the site.


http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/69716/post-661542;topicseen#msg661542


----------



## armyvern (2 Feb 2010)

Avalon said:
			
		

> Good Day,
> I am currently working in Belgium on shifts(12hrs) and during the Christmas holidays I was tasked with 2 x 24 hrs shifts.  I've since put in a memo for supper and late night meals allowance but has been refused because I don't have receipts.  I work in a secure area alone and requires me to stay in my office and cannot leave the area for more than 10 mins.  There is no box lunches provided or mess and deliveries cannot be made on SHAPE.  I've been on the internet looking at policies and cannot seems to find anything that would support my request.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.  Thank you.



Over the Christmas holdiays 2008, I did a series of Duty Os; as the mess was closed during the periods of my duties, we had to order out our meals; we were clearly briefed that we must keep our receipts in order to claim the meal - I'm actually quite sure they had us all sign a word doc sheet stating as much as part of our mass briefings prior to the holidays. I kept all mine and was reimbursed my "actual costs" for those purchased meals (not the daily meal rate) IAW regulations.

On one of my DutyOs, the gentlemen who was the B Duty Sgt managed to lose his receipt for his supper purchase. It was 18 bucks (and change) because I was there when he ordered, paid and consumed it. He wrote up a short little memo stating that he had lost his receipt and I wrote one advising that he had indeed purchased the meal during our duty. He included them with his other recipts. He was reimbursed the 18 bucks, but not the change (because we couldn't remember exactly how much the 'change' was) for his meal.

The directives are pretty clear - you must retain your receipts and will be reimbursed only for actual expenses (else we'd have shiftworkers all over the country bringing in their baggie lunches & microwave dinners from home, but charging the taxpayers for meals never purchased during their shifts). 

Was there anything in your briefing about having to provide for your own meals during the holidays? Anything that stated that meals could not be provided by the employer while on duty? This was all clearly laid out to us in our duty brief. Anyone to back up that fact that you actually did incur the expense (ie a witness)?

If not, if you have access to online banking ... perhaps some print screens which show your debit being used for "restaurant X at Y time on Z date in the amount of $$"? Proof that the purchases were actually made?

Other than that, I don't know what to tell you.


----------



## aesop081 (2 Feb 2010)

Buy your food before going to work, keep your receipts. I do it all the time.


----------



## Avalon (3 Feb 2010)

Thank you for your input.  I was not explain nothing as I work on the international side.  I was expected to dragged all 4 meals with me for a 24 hrs period since I can't leave to go get a meal.  There are not many restaurants with take away options close by and at that time of the year, they are pretty much all closed.  I was just thinking of when I would be on duty for 24 hrs in Canada, we would have a meal provided by the mess and a box lunch for late night meal, I guess it's a whole different ball of wax when in Europe.


----------



## aesop081 (3 Feb 2010)

Avalon said:
			
		

> There are not many restaurants with take away options close by and at that time of the year, they are pretty much all closed.



They have grocery stores in Europe. I know, i go there a bit. Like i said in my last post, i do this meal on duty thing a fair bit.


----------



## 4Feathers (3 Feb 2010)

It's too bad the CF does not go with what most top industry does, a fixed rate for meals and incidentals for every day on commercial TD. You input the time you left and the time you got back, where you went, and it's all automatic. The money saved on bureaucracy and administration is far outweighs the risk of someone getting a freebee or skipping a meal. Of course we are a public funded org so we must spend extra to be inefficient but transparent. Briefing (rant) complete.


----------



## HercFE (3 Feb 2010)

That's funny our Sqn works off the Treasury board rates, the only exception is late night meals which require receipts. Also if we land after meal ours at home with no on-route stops we have to provide a receipt which we are reimbursed for actual cost. Any other time on TD we get the full perdium with out receipts.


----------



## dapaterson (3 Feb 2010)

4Feathers said:
			
		

> It's too bad the CF does not go with what most top industry does, a fixed rate for meals and incidentals for every day on commercial TD. You input the time you left and the time you got back, where you went, and it's all automatic. The money saved on bureaucracy and administration is far outweighs the risk of someone getting a freebee or skipping a meal. Of course we are a public funded org so we must spend extra to be inefficient but transparent. Briefing (rant) complete.



You may wish to investigate the facts.

DND/CF do pay flat rate reimbursements for meals and incidentals while on travel status.   For those on travel status, an automated system calculates entitlements and interfaces to provide DFT of approved reimbursements.

The situation discussed here is for individuals not on travel status; that is, at their usual duty location, who for work reasons are unable to eat their normal meal.  In those cases, reimbursement is for actual expenditures (with receipt) up to the limits designated by Treasury Board.


Thus, air crew on a daytrip to another city are reimbursed at TB rates for meals while away from home; if back home but working late they must submit receipts.

It's pretty simple.


----------



## aesop081 (3 Feb 2010)

HercFE said:
			
		

> That's funny our Sqn works off the Treasury board rates, the only exception is late night meals which require receipts. Also if we land after meal ours at home with no on-route stops we have to provide a receipt which we are reimbursed for actual cost. Any other time on TD we get the full perdium with out receipts.



It is tghe same for my Sqn, but the situation described by the original poster is something different. I understand the situation he's in and dealing with it is not complicated.


----------



## Klinkaroo (9 May 2010)

Disclaimer : Spent an hour reading rations threads and could not find the answer to my question.

So here is the deal, just transferred to the Reg force last week and now have to pay for my Rations and Quarters. I live in Quarters here on base in Esquimalt and work up at 443 Sqn (a 30-40min drive). I cannot get a move as I am not trained in my new trade. The only military mess hall is here in Esquimalt, as you can see I cannot go to the Mess for Lunch and most Breakfast as I often have to be up at the Squadron by 0630 some mornings. When I talked with the rations clerk she told me that she would just not put me on rations since I wouldn't be able to eat what I paid for and just paying cash when I do go to the mess. I have been tracking my expenses (cost of paying for meals cash and cost of groceries for brown bag lunches) and it is not looking like it is in my best interest.

Question is, if they did link me to rations, if my place of duty is at a certain distance from the mess hall could I be entitled to a Box Lunch, picked up in the morning possibly? They deliver box lunches to the squadron for the Aircrew, maybe they could send mine up with the same order?


----------



## ammocat (9 May 2010)

Not sure how things work in Esquimalt, but address your situation through your CoC. They should be able to make arrangements for you to pick up a box lunch for breakfast prior to departing for work. I have been in similar situations and have never had a problem, although I have never used this as a long tern solution.


----------



## Pusser (10 May 2010)

The simple answer is yes, since you are on ration strength and cannot reasonably get to the mess for lunch, you are entitled to a box lunch.  Picking it up yourself at Nelles before heading out to Pat Bay or having it form part of the order for the aircrew are both viable options.  I would check with whoever orders them for the aircrew first and see where it goes from there.  When they place the order they should be able to say X# for aircrew and X# for personnel on ration strength.


----------



## HercFE (10 May 2010)

Years ago (several) I was in your situation, same Sqn, same quarters, same problem. I had a box lunch delivered with the aircrew meals. It work out pretty good except for the few times my box lunch was "accidentally" eaten by someone else.


----------



## Klinkaroo (11 May 2010)

Thanks everyone, going to talk to them first thing in the morning.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (11 May 2010)

There is a lengthy thread somewhere about something like this where Vern injected her wisdom,...unfortunately, I don't have time to look for it right now.


----------



## gcclarke (11 May 2010)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> There is a lengthy thread somewhere about something like this where Vern injected her wisdom,...unfortunately, I don't have time to look for it right now.



Is it this one Bruce?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (11 May 2010)

gcclarke said:
			
		

> Is it this one Bruce?



Yes, thank you.
..and now they are as one.


----------



## chubakah (20 Mar 2011)

Ref: Treasury Board of Canada (renamed National Joint Counsel)

I would be careful with this ref, it could be interpreted as civilian policy to assist there collective agreements.  Regardless, we all know that the Military Regulations, Orders and Policies (ok directories, as well) are currently in a flux.....IR need I say more.

The ref policy states, if a mbr is required to work during an unscheduled work time they are entitled to be reimbursed, at a reasonable amount, all expenses incurred.    

I feel the need to counter act this policy with the fact that we are paid on a salary, and expected to place duty before self....are we not always expected to respond 24/7?  

Your call. but CFAO's do not apply, the Aid Du Memoir is not policy, but put in place to guide us as a simple reference....and good luck with QR&O's, and CFAO's.....DAOD's...rare. 

This one is fun!


----------



## armyvern (20 Mar 2011)

chubakah said:
			
		

> Ref: Treasury Board of Canada (renamed National Joint Counsel)
> 
> I would be careful with this ref, it could be interpreted as civilian policy to assist there collective agreements.  Regardless, we all know that the Military Regulations, Orders and Policies (ok directories, as well) are currently in a flux.....IR need I say more.
> 
> ...



Yes, we would be expected to respond 24/7 ... and we'd also be expected to be covered for meals etc if that recall need to occur. You are ordered to work for the second time in a 24 hour period and you are covered - both mileage and meals if required. And, that is one policy that was/is still in effect as of last Wednesday night with a valid pol reference for re-imbursement on claim. Everything didn't stop with those CANFORGENs and if you think it did ... I hope to hell that you aren't working in an Orderly Room somewhere using "_your_ call" on claims. It's not your call Miss Muffet, and never has been. 

The NJC did not change it's rules with it's name change.

Oh Yeah -- as for your "this one is fun comment" --- you do realize that there is a whole Task Force of pers away from their homes right now undergoing work-up trg since November 2010 who have no access to common rooms with TV, tie-lines to call home to their spouses/families across Canada, access to transport to go downtown on weekends off etc ... who are and have been receiving sweet-fuck-all in the way of benefits because they are "attach posted" for the year instead of "TD'd" for the year? And you -- you think it's funny?? From me to you, on their behalves, kiss my ass.

It's not funny. It's unimaginable that pers "attached posted" away from their families for up to a year (with a further seperation to occur while actually deployed overseas) to do training to deploy overseas are entitled to sweet fuck all right now in the way of benefits to assist them with paying for cable or phone calls home once a week etc ...

while those on "TD" to courses in Borden etc for a mere 3 weeks are collecting 17.35 a day for the first 30 days, then 13 bucks a day after that. simply because they are TDd and not attach posted. A whole heck of a lot of them are also travelling home every weekend to see their familes too, and living in quarters with common rooms with TV and tie-line access ... what is wrong with this picture!!??

It's not "fun", it's a situation that needs to get clarified and sorted soonest. It is costing some of us a lot. There are people working hard at the highest levels to sort this all out, please don`t denigrate their efforts at actually helping troops with your .02 cents.


----------



## Pusser (21 Mar 2011)

chubakah said:
			
		

> Ref: Treasury Board of Canada (renamed National Joint Counsel)
> 
> I would be careful with this ref, it could be interpreted as civilian policy to assist there collective agreements.  Regardless, we all know that the Military Regulations, Orders and Policies (ok directories, as well) are currently in a flux.....IR need I say more.
> 
> ...



First off, Treasury Board and the National Joint Council are two different things.  The NJC is a forum for the development and negotiation of benefits.  Treasury Board is one of many  members of the NJC, as is the CF.

Secondly, in what way do CFAOs not apply?  Although we are in the process of transforming some CFAOs into DAODs, the basic premises of the policies behind them remain the same.  The chief reason for moving to DAODs was that the Department wanted CFAOs to apply to DND civilians in some cases and legal opinion was reluctant to accept that civilian employees could be ordered to do anything.  Hence the wording in DAODs that CF members are "ordered" and civilian employees are "directed," but I digress.

To the best of my knowledge (unfortunately, I'm not on the DIN at the moment and can't confirm it), CFAO 36-14 (Entitlement to Rations at Public Expense) is still in effect.  This CFAO is convoluted and you have to read the entire thing to understand it, but it boils down to this on this issue.  If you are required to work longer than normal and that extended time goes past a "normal" meal hour, then you are entitled to rations at public expense.  This shall normally be provided from a CF dining facility if possible (if it's closed by the time you get back to the base, it's not possible).  If it's not possible, then you are entitled to reimbursement for actual and reasonable  expenses for the meal.  "Actual' means you have to provide a receipt to prove you spent the money and "reasonable" means you are limited to the approved meal rate for the meal in question.

The policy of the CF is that if we put you in certain situations, you are entitled to meals at public expense.  CFAO 36-14 is the regulation that describes how we do it.

On a final note, ArmyVern is absolutely right.


----------



## Evocatus (2 Jan 2013)

Related funny story -  My boss in  NDHQ was working late [past 1800 hrs], so he used his issue BB to order a delivery pizza, which he subsequently did not claim, altho he could have...

Point:  a few weeks later he recieved notification from the local Comm Sqn telecom types, that his call to the pizza joint, on his issue BB, was flagged as inappropriate & contraveined thier policy and he was being assessed [billed] .27 cents for the 'unauthorized' call....

WTF ?   ???  ...if the pizza was a valid expense, then so was the call to order it !  Problem is, the Comm Sqn guys don't know that.

Needless to say, the 'notification' is framed on his wall


----------



## Quellefille (7 Feb 2013)

Evocatus said:
			
		

> Related funny story -  My boss in  NDHQ was working late [past 1800 hrs], so he used his issue BB to order a delivery pizza, which he subsequently did not claim, altho he could have...
> 
> Point:  a few weeks later he recieved notification from the local Comm Sqn telecom types, that his call to the pizza joint, on his issue BB, was flagged as inappropriate & contraveined thier policy and he was being assessed [billed] .27 cents for the 'unauthorized' call....
> 
> ...



my favourite retired Col. had a similar thing.  they got on her for all the calls she made from her home to her bb.  She kept forgetting the bb, calling her son, asking her son to find it and bring it out and she grabbed it from him.  he was a teenager, and just called it from the home phone rather than looking for it.  And it would go through and BAM charges.

She thought it was damn funny.  took her a few days to figure it out, but damned funny


----------



## Millerrg (15 Apr 2013)

Are the ration expenses paid during BMQ eligible as a deduction on income tax?


----------



## George Wallace (15 Apr 2013)

Millerrg said:
			
		

> Are the ration expenses paid during BMQ eligible as a deduction on income tax?



Before you ask.....Rations and QUARTERS are not tax deductions.   

Why would you even have to ask that?   You do have to eat.  You have never had food of any sort at home considered a tax deduction, have you?

You aren't trying to steal oxygen now are you?


----------



## Millerrg (15 Apr 2013)

Is it possible to claim the room and board (ration expense) for the BMQ Course as an expense on your income tax?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (15 Apr 2013)

You've already been to 'no' once today - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/69716/post-1223718.html#msg1223718

Continuing to ask won't change that.

Don't ask again.

---Staff---


----------



## Millerrg (16 Apr 2013)

Does anyone know or have tried claiming room and board expenses for training courses (such as BMQ) as an expense deduction on income tax?


----------



## Harris (16 Apr 2013)

You have asked this same question 3 times.  NO is the answer.  Stop posting the same question.

---STAFF---


----------



## orangutan (26 Mar 2014)

Question:

A soldier is a vegetarian, his CoC is well aware of this. He is sent to the range for the day (0700 till 1700) to sentry ammo. He arrives to find out that no vegetarian meal has been provided for him. What reference can he use to make a complaint? I have had situations like this happen while on ex and found out after the fact that you can't just put in a meal claim and be paid for a missed meal. You have to go get a meal and bring in a receipt for reimbursement. In this situation he is not able to come in from the range to do so... (poor leadership in the CoC  : ). Having trouble locating a reference in QR&O's or DAOD's. 

Thanks


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (26 Mar 2014)

Now I'm not leaning one way or another here but, if I were a special diet, I would make it my responsibility EACH time to remind them about my meal requirements................when planning a large scenario one person's dietary habits wouldn't really be that hard to overlook.  

Like I tell inmates........"you had better remind me because it means a whole lot more to you than it does to me."


----------



## Crispy Bacon (26 Mar 2014)

orangutan said:
			
		

> Question:
> 
> A soldier is a vegetarian, his CoC is well aware of this. He is sent to the range for the day (0700 till 1700) to sentry ammo. He arrives to find out that no vegetarian meal has been provided for him. What reference can he use to make a complaint? I have had situations like this happen while on ex and found out after the fact that you can't just put in a meal claim and be paid for a missed meal. You have to go get a meal and bring in a receipt for reimbursement. In this situation he is not able to come in from the range to do so... (poor leadership in the CoC  : ). Having trouble locating a reference in QR&O's or DAOD's.
> 
> Thanks



QR&O 36.35:



> *36.35 – ENTITLEMENT TO RATIONS*
> 
> (1) Except as prescribed in paragraph (2), the commanding officer of a base, unit or element is entitled to draw a daily ration to the approved scale for:
> 
> ...



CBI 210.83



> 210.83 – MEAL EXPENSE – RESERVE FORCE ON
> CLASS "A" OR "B" RESERVE SERVICE
> 
> 210.83(1) (Meal expense) An officer or noncommissioned
> ...



CFAO 36-14:


> When a member who is on ration strength cannot be provided with
> a meal from DND food services, he may claim for actual out-of-pocket
> expenses for meals not exceeding the rates prescribed for individual meals
> in Annex A to 209-13.



The DAOD 3012 series might also help.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (26 Mar 2014)

That's all fine and dandy but the cavet is that a meal was provided....


----------



## OldSolduer (26 Mar 2014)

NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> That's all fine and dandy but the cavet is that a meal was provided....



First things first - this a case of poor leadership. If the soldier informed his CoC that he/she is a vegetarian then the CoC from the sect 2i/c and up should know about it and provide the meal. Who ever forgot to feed the solider needs a strip torn off him/her.

As for reimbursement, he/she should be reimbursed in some fashion.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (26 Mar 2014)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> First things first - this a case of poor leadership. If the soldier informed his CoC that he/she is a vegetarian then the CoC from the sect 2i/c and up should know about it and provide the meal. Who ever forgot to feed the solider needs a strip torn off him/her.



I wouldn't go making that jump yet.........IF he reminded them then yes, but I put the responsibility on the person requesting a 'lifestyle" meal to make sure the COC is aware each time.  
I'm also curious if the OP could tell us what foods were sent out?


----------



## DAA (26 Mar 2014)

orangutan said:
			
		

> Question:
> 
> A soldier is a vegetarian, his CoC is well aware of this. He is sent to the range for the day (0700 till 1700) to sentry ammo. He arrives to find out that no vegetarian meal has been provided for him. What reference can he use to make a complaint? I have had situations like this happen while on ex and found out after the fact that you can't just put in a meal claim and be paid for a missed meal. You have to go get a meal and bring in a receipt for reimbursement. In this situation he is not able to come in from the range to do so... (poor leadership in the CoC  : ). Having trouble locating a reference in QR&O's or DAOD's.
> 
> Thanks



Even if you brought in a receipt, you probably won't be reimbursed anyhow.  The CF merely attempts to "accommodate" your special dietary requirements but they are not "obligated" to go out of their way.  The only exception would be in cases, where a medical condition exists.

Being a vegetarian, is a personal choice.


----------



## OldSolduer (26 Mar 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> Being a vegetarian, is a personal choice.



Agree , but if the soldier has informed the CoC over and over again and they continue to "forget" .....see my point?

We accommodate people of faith with kosher food.....so why not a vegetarian.


----------



## DAA (26 Mar 2014)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> Agree , but if the soldier has informed the CoC over and over again and they continue to "forget" .....see my point?
> 
> We accommodate people of faith with kosher food.....so why not a vegetarian.



Noted and understood.  When it comes to "special dietary" choices, the food services manual indicates that "CAF Food Svcs managers should consider diner pereferences, as well as the impact on cost, when determining if specific foods should be offered."  Mind you, I do believe that a "vegetarian" option is not  just available in the Mess Halls and IMP's but also for dispersed meals (ie; box lunchs) as well.

So, yup, maybe they just plain "forgot" or something else factored into the equation.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (26 Mar 2014)

Jim Seggie said:
			
		

> First things first - this a case of poor leadership. If the soldier informed his CoC that he/she is a vegetarian then the CoC from the sect 2i/c and up should know about it and provide the meal. Who ever forgot to feed the solider needs a strip torn off him/her.
> 
> As for reimbursement, he/she should be reimbursed in some fashion.



I agree Jim but as you know if it is provided then they will not consider it...


----------



## orangutan (26 Mar 2014)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Now I'm not leaning one way or another here but, if I were a special diet, I would make it my responsibility EACH time to remind them about my meal requirements................when planning a large scenario one person's dietary habits wouldn't really be that hard to overlook.
> 
> Like I tell inmates........"you had better remind me because it means a whole lot more to you than it does to me."




His CoC definitely is aware of his dietary requirements. He mentioned it this morning before again before leaving for the range.



			
				NFLD Sapper said:
			
		

> That's all fine and dandy but the cavet is that a meal was provided....



No meal was provided to him.  



			
				Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> I wouldn't go making that jump yet.........IF he reminded them then yes, but I put the responsibility on the person requesting a 'lifestyle" meal to make sure the COC is aware each time.
> I'm also curious if the OP could tell us what foods were sent out?



Being  a vegetarian is not a "lifestyle" convenience... because we live in a continent that capitalizes on people thinking they need meat in their diets... does not make it the "normal" diet.  Religious beliefs come to mind.  It is a right and freedom.  Goodness. Why bother even having veggie rats if this is the go to when a scenario like this arises. Stop recruiting vegetarians now?

Regarding foods sent out, regular rations were provided for everyone else. As an update to the situation, he returned from the range at 1400, still having not been fed, and was ordered to go to the MIR to retrieve a Protected B document his CoC had lost and needed him to retrieve. That took priority over his eating. When asked if he could eat he was told by his superior (WO) that he "doesn't care that he didn't eat yet, he needs that piece of paper."  He walked to the MIR, retrieved the piece of paper and because the WO had left for the day, at 1500 the MCpl gave him time to go eat. 




			
				DAA said:
			
		

> Even if you brought in a receipt, you probably won't be reimbursed anyhow.  The CF merely attempts to "accommodate" your special dietary requirements but they are not "obligated" to go out of their way.  The only exception would be in cases, where a medical condition exists.
> 
> Being a vegetarian, is a personal choice.



I digress, what about religious beliefs. 
It is disappointing when a lower rank's needs are viewed as choices, and a higher rank's needs are viewed as requirements. From day one the first thing a corporal, or even a senior private is taught is to feed his guys and take care of them. People fail simple 2.0 courses because of neglect.  This instance today was not a difficult one to deal with, IMO.  Our troop stores has vegetarian rats there. Would have been very easy to have someone run one out. 

I will add, this soldier did not stroll in one day and decide to be a vegetarian on the fly. He has plenty of time in and tours. 
Thank you for the references, Crispy Bacon. This has been very helpful.


----------



## DAA (26 Mar 2014)

orangutan said:
			
		

> His CoC definitely is aware of his dietary requirements. He mentioned it this morning before again before leaving for the range.
> 
> No meal was provided to him.
> 
> ...



Religious beliefs and personal dietary choices are two difference things.

The local Food Svc Provider did their job, albeit maybe not very well.  So the problem obviously lies between whom ever is submitting the ration requests for the unit and the Kitchen that is filling those requests.  If the request submitted by the Unit specified a "vegetarian" feeding option and that request wasn't fulfilled, then you know where to look but if the Unit didn't specify in their request.........This is by no means a "rank" thing on the part of the member disadvantaged.

It's no different than me saying "I don't like to eat X" and then they serve X.  Like my mother used to tell me and that was well before joining the CF, eat what's put in front of you or go hungry.

And good luck getting "kosher" food served in a CF mess, let alone in the field!


----------



## PMedMoe (26 Mar 2014)

orangutan said:
			
		

> As an update to the situation, he returned from the range at 1400, still having not been fed, and was ordered to go to the MIR to retrieve a Protected B document his CoC had lost and needed him to retrieve. That took priority over his eating. When asked if he could eat he was told by his superior (WO) that he "doesn't care that he didn't eat yet, he needs that piece of paper."  He walked to the MIR, retrieved the piece of paper and because the WO had left for the day, at 1500 the MCpl gave him time to go eat.



The WO sounds like he's just dicking someone around.  What an ass.

Back to the food.  I noticed you mentioned vegetarian rats in troop stores.  If it was IMPs out on the ranges, surely he could have found _something_ (maybe not the main meal) to eat from one of them?


----------



## orangutan (26 Mar 2014)

DAA: no soldier with vegetarian rations sitting in their stores cage or made available by the CF should "go hungry".  Apples and oranges. A warrant officer is no soldier's mother, nor is he expected to be by my peers.  Have a little empathy for those with dietary restrictions. Proper meals ought to be provided when given AMPLE notice (in this case, years) when they ARE easily available whether it's a food allergy, a religious belief or what have you.
I am not arguing eating or going hungry. I am arguing the situation at hand. Devil's advocate for could have, would have, should have situations are not what I'm looking for here. I'm looking for help for him to get compensation in some way.



			
				PMedMoe said:
			
		

> The WO sounds like he's just dicking someone around.  What an ***.
> 
> Back to the food.  I noticed you mentioned vegetarian rats in troop stores.  If it was IMPs out on the ranges, surely he could have found _something_ (maybe not the main meal) to eat from one of them?



Yes IMP's. Indeed one could snack on maybe bread or what have you, but really that's no meal, eh? Imagine if you were given a piece of IMP bread and a pouch of fruit as lunch. That's no lunch. It's the principal of it.


----------



## armyvern (26 Mar 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> So, yup, maybe they just plain "forgot" or something else factored into the equation.



I have many vegans, kosher etc dietary considerations within my current Unit that we consider during ranges, exercises etc.

If one is assigned a task that is running over the meal hour, say --- ammo sentry, and one has special dietary considerations, the onus is on the member to report that consideration ... each time.

During EXs and ranges when my SQs are returning their daily ADREPs or FSRs - the onus is on them to differentiate the types/qty of special meals they will require for the next 24 hours (ie: the next day).  If they do not note that they require vegan, no fish, kosher etc --- they get regular meals.  This is not something that you tell your CoC once and expect to occur each and every time thereafter; the onus is on the member to report each task/EX.

Kind of like how every mess dinner the list goes out asking for allergies/alcohol etc --- and those attending must report their special needs each and every mess dinner.

Making/providing a kosher or vegan meal is as simple as making any box lunch, IMP, haybox or fresh these days.

Expecting the KO or the CoC to remember is not on. The KO works for me and I have to report each and every range, task and EX (especially on Fridays) that I will be requiring fish-free meals.

It is the member's responsibilty to report special considerations _*each time*_ they are tasked to duty over a meal hour, and once per exercise etc (because once they report once during that EX their SQs should be tracking for the ADREPs and FSRs. If the member reports, they will be fed.  If the member fails to effect notification, they may not be.  Onus is on the member to initiate notification of special dietary considerations - once per individual activity/tasl/EX and the further in advance of that task, the better.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (26 Mar 2014)

orangutan said:
			
		

> No meal was provided to him.



I find that very very hard to believe... you don't send a person on sentry for 10 hours and provide no meals..... and if that is the case then the CoC needs a kick in the nuts with a size 12 combat boot.....


----------



## PuckChaser (26 Mar 2014)

Was it IMPs or box lunches? I find it really hard to believe he couldn't find a few people to give him bread/jam/peanut butter to at least make a few sandwiches if it was IMPs.


----------



## armyvern (26 Mar 2014)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Was it IMPs or box lunches? I find it really hard to believe he couldn't find a few people to give him bread/jam/peanut butter to at least make a few sandwiches if it was IMPs.



It shouldn't have been IMPs at a range .... (suspect box lunch)

Unless that range happened in the midst of an EX.


----------



## PMedMoe (26 Mar 2014)

orangutan said:
			
		

> Yes IMP's. Indeed one could snack on maybe bread or what have you, but really that's no meal, eh? Imagine if you were given a piece of IMP bread and a pouch of fruit as lunch. That's no lunch. It's the principal of it.



*ahem*   

It was IMPs, folks.   :nod:

Honestly, for the cost of one lunch, I think I'd bite the bullet on this one.  Pick your battles.  Just my  :2c:


----------



## DAA (26 Mar 2014)

orangutan said:
			
		

> DAA: no soldier with vegetarian rations sitting in their stores cage or made available by the CF should "go hungry".  Apples and oranges. A warrant officer is no soldier's mother, nor is he expected to be by my peers.  Have a little empathy for those with dietary restrictions. Proper meals ought to be provided when given AMPLE notice (in this case, years) when they ARE easily available whether it's a food allergy, a religious belief or what have you.
> I am not arguing eating or going hungry. I am arguing the situation at hand. Devil's advocate for could have, would have, should have situations are not what I'm looking for here. I'm looking for help for him to get compensation in some way.
> 
> Yes IMP's. Indeed one could snack on maybe bread or what have you, but really that's no meal, eh? Imagine if you were given a piece of IMP bread and a pouch of fruit as lunch. That's no lunch. It's the principal of it.



Don't get me wrong, I fully understand what you are saying and I also support what you're saying.  But you don't know just what was ordered and unless you see the Ration Request, you and I can only speculate on what may or may not have happened.  It sounds like a "small party" tasking, so a vegan meal really shouldn't have been that huge a deal.  But as mentioned by ArmyVern above, the CF member must be and needs to be proactive each and everytime.

But keep in mind, feeding troops, is not a simple task, even though everyone would think it is.  How hard can it be?  Well, it's alot harder than you think.  So yes, things can go wrong more often than they will go right, especially when you're asking Food Svcs to "stray from the norm".

You want to pin point the problem?  It's simple, ask for a copy of the FSR, if the FSR doesn't specifiy a "vegan option", then you have solved your problem.  If the FSR does, then your unit needs to ask the service provider, why the requirements in the FSR weren't fullfilled.


----------



## CountDC (27 Mar 2014)

orangutan said:
			
		

> Yes IMP's. Indeed one could snack on maybe bread or what have you, but really that's no meal, eh? Imagine if you were given a piece of IMP bread and a pouch of fruit as lunch. That's no lunch. It's the principal of it.



That would depend on if the member mentioned it in time for his special request to be filled.  I often don't mention my special diet (religious and health) and live with whatever I end up with, picking through for what I can eat. Crackers, Peanut Butter and Fruit Pouches have been my saviour several times.  if I can't be bothered to remember mentioning it everytime needed then why should i expect my chain of command to remember? 

I would have an MTEC submitted with receipt to the CO for approval with all the facts detailed in a minute.  If he wants to be nice maybe he will approve.  As an approving auth I certainly wouldn't with what has been presented here.  The first question I would have if such a claim came to me is - When did the member advise his chain that he would be attending the exercise and had special diet requirements? Second is - where is the proof (email, note, memo. collaborating email/note from his chain)?


----------



## Mungo (11 Mar 2015)

I'm a reservist. Our unit CO recently told us that there would be no more food claims, unless specifically approved by an officer. This is due to the fact that our unit has repeatedly failed to send us home by 1800 on sundays after field exes. This year, they've smartened up about this, and they only happened to screw us over once or so. 

However, our CO recently also told us that we can no longer claim for lunches when we are working class A/B at the unit on account of the fact that there is a kitchenette in our unit, and that we are thus able to make a lunch at home and bring it here to eat whenever we work. Just to be clear, we aren't getting box lunches, or hayboxes or whatnot; We've literally been told to bring our own lunches to work.

I've read the QR&O 36.35 as well as CBI 210.83 that were posted higher up in this thread. I see no special exemption for bringing our own lunches. Am I wrong in thinking that we are being screwed out of our entitlements?


----------



## Kat Stevens (11 Mar 2015)

You have to buy your own lunch?  Just like thousands of military pers do every single day?  That's hardly fair, I'd quit.


----------



## Teager (11 Mar 2015)

Mungo said:
			
		

> I'm a reservist. Our unit CO recently told us that there would be no more food claims, unless specifically approved by an officer. This is due to the fact that our unit has repeatedly failed to send us home by 1800 on sundays after field exes. This year, they've smartened up about this, and they only happened to screw us over once or so.
> 
> However, our CO recently also told us that we can no longer claim for lunches when we are working class A/B at the unit on account of the fact that there is a kitchenette in our unit, and that we are thus able to make a lunch at home and bring it here to eat whenever we work. Just to be clear, we aren't getting box lunches, or hayboxes or whatnot; We've literally been told to bring our own lunches to work.
> 
> ...


----------



## PMedMoe (11 Mar 2015)

Mungo said:
			
		

> We've literally been told to bring our own lunches to work.



 :crybaby:



			
				Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> You have to buy your own lunch?  Just like thousands of military pers do every single day?  That's hardly fair, I'd quit.



 :goodpost:


----------



## DAA (11 Mar 2015)

Mungo said:
			
		

> I'm a reservist. Our unit CO recently told us that there would be no more food claims, unless specifically approved by an officer. This is due to the fact that our unit has repeatedly failed to send us home by 1800 on sundays after field exes. This year, they've smartened up about this, and they only happened to screw us over once or so.
> 
> However, our CO recently also told us that we can no longer claim for lunches when we are working class A/B at the unit on account of the fact that there is a kitchenette in our unit, and that we are thus able to make a lunch at home and bring it here to eat whenever we work. Just to be clear, we aren't getting box lunches, or hayboxes or whatnot; We've literally been told to bring our own lunches to work.
> 
> I've read the QR&O 36.35 as well as CBI 210.83 that were posted higher up in this thread. I see no special exemption for bringing our own lunches. Am I wrong in thinking that we are being screwed out of our entitlements?



And this is why I stopped eating lunch years ago!

Actually, take a closer look at CFAO 36-14 but at the end of the day, if your unit was allowing you to "claim" for a meal, then they probably didn't bother to read the CFTDTI's

Specifically Chapter 5  - CFTDTI 5.19
(2) (Meal Breaks) Every superior officer shall — unless it is exceptionally unreasonable to do so — provide a meal break to a member approximately midway through a regular work period or shift for the member to obtain a meal at the member’s expense. 
(3) (Meals — Delay) A reasonably delayed meal hour does not by itself create an entitlement to a meal at Crown expense.


----------



## Mungo (11 Mar 2015)

DAA said:
			
		

> And this is why I stopped eating lunch years ago!
> 
> Actually, take a closer look at CFAO 36-14 but at the end of the day, if your unit was allowing you to "claim" for a meal, then they probably didn't bother to read the CFTDTI's
> 
> ...



Thanks for the feedback. I appreciate you posting the actual legalese too. It's sometimes hard to know exactly what we are and aren't entitled to.

Edit: Just so I'm sure that I understand this situation 100%, when does CBI 210.83 apply?


----------



## DAA (11 Mar 2015)

Mungo said:
			
		

> Thanks for the feedback. I appreciate you posting the actual legalese too. It's sometimes hard to know exactly what we are and aren't entitled to.
> 
> Edit: Just so I'm sure that I understand this situation 100%, when does CBI 210.83 apply?



CBI 210.83 must be read in conjunction with QR&O 36.35 and also with CBI 208.505.  CBI 208.505 is basically the trigger and deals with personnel who are "subject to deducations for the provision of rations."  So if you are living in shacks, paying for rations (monthly) and are not afforded the opportunity to attend the Mess Hall during a meal hour or not provided with a box lunch, then 210.83 would apply.


----------



## Mungo (11 Mar 2015)

Alright. Thanks a lot for clarifying that point, DAA. Much appreciated.


----------



## DAA (11 Mar 2015)

Mungo said:
			
		

> Alright. Thanks a lot for clarifying that point, DAA. Much appreciated.



My guess........this is most likely the result of recent changes to regulations associated with budget management/expenses.  All costs associated with TD, the provision of Accommodations (Qtrs) and Food Svcs (Rations) are now limited to a % of the overall Unit budget allocation.

So whilst you and all the others might see this as your CoC putting the screws to you, in essence, they might not have much of a choice in the matter.


----------



## Pusser (12 Mar 2015)

I would hypothesize that your unit was being overly generous before.  Referring back to CFAO 36-14, the only realy excuse for providing rations at public expense (i.e. feeding you for free) is if you are not given a break and allowed to leave the unit for lunch or your are prohibited from bringing your own packed lunch (this is how ships are allowed to provide lunch for the ship's company while alongside in home port).


----------



## Jarnhamar (4 Oct 2016)

Is there a policy or entitlement for members having meals when on course and working out of area? 

For example you're  a student on a comms course held out of your unit and when you show up for work you're told by course staff you'll be training out of the local area for the day.  No box lunches are provided and you won't be provided a meal claim so you're basically on your own.   Is that allowable?


----------



## captloadie (4 Oct 2016)

You'll probably need to provide more detail. Is your course covered by a claim for the who period? Are you outside your normal geographical area? If not, were you informed beforehand? Did you have access to areas to purchase a meal, or to store a meal brought from home?


----------



## Ostrozac (4 Oct 2016)

CFTDI seems pretty clear that if you are on ration strength, you either get a box lunch or meal claim (CFTDI 5.18.2.e). And if you are not on ration strength, and if there is an appropriate lunch room, you bring a meal from home (CFTDI 5.18.2.c.ii). 

It's certainly arguable that if you are training offsite, that there is no appropriate lunch room (fridge, microwave) to have your brown-bag lunch -- and therefore the member would get a meal claim.


----------



## George Wallace (4 Oct 2016)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Is there a policy or entitlement for members having meals when on course and working out of area?
> 
> For example you're  a student on a comms course held out of your unit and when you show up for work you're told by course staff you'll be training out of the local area for the day.  No box lunches are provided and you won't be provided a meal claim so you're basically on your own.   Is that allowable?



Would a MTech (Spelling?) cover that?  Keep your receipts and make a claim at your OR; or is this no longer done?


----------



## ModlrMike (4 Oct 2016)

I think you mean MTEC (Minor Travel Expense Claim) which I believe doesn't exist any more. We're doing all of ours on a CF 52 General Allowance Claim. Receipts are required (credit card slips are not sufficient, it needs to be the itemized receipt).

Your substantiation in this instance is:

CFTDI 5.01.b and CFTDI 5.18.2.f


----------



## kratz (4 Oct 2016)

My spouse confirmed MTEC remain a valid claim, with clerks in your SHO / OR. The MTEC is done through ClaimsX.


----------



## CountDC (5 Oct 2016)

MTECs do exist and are still often used.

CFTDTI 5 would not apply in the case presented as stated "out of local area".  6 would be more of an area to look at.  If this applies then receipts would not be required. I suspect though that it was actually a case of alternative site within the local area which 5.a then would cover under 5.18 if all the conditions are met.

Of course the approving auth should be considering what is different between you having lunch at the regular site as opposed to the alternative site.  If you brought lunch with you anyway why couldn't you take it to the new location? Available meal facility is not absolute as a lunch room, that is provided as an example.  It could also be the classroom itself if you are allowed to eat there and considered suitable by the approving authority.  Some people also like to say because no microwave was available or they were not allowed to go for lunch until 1330h they should be allowed to claim even though their lunch is sandwich and salad brought from home.  

remember it is reasonable meal expenses.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (24 Jul 2019)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> And.... parade everyone at 0630hrs and go for a 30 minute run every day, with the ICs at the front and the 2ICs at the back... with the Rottweilers



And.... Put everyone on a diet of one small croissant and a cup of coffee, Légion Étrangère style.


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 Jul 2019)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> And.... Put everyone on a diet of one small croissant and a cup of coffee, (plus a sound thrashing) Légion Étrangère style.



FTFY


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Jul 2019)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> And.... Put everyone on a diet of one small croissant and a cup of coffee, Légion Étrangère style.


Now THAT's only fair if they get rough red wine with supper as well  ;D


----------



## dapaterson (26 Jul 2019)

We subsidize messes and CANEX.  It's a choice to support unhealthy living.

If we're going to subsidize lifestyle choices, let's support healthy ones, not alcohol, caffeine and nicotine.


----------



## Pusser (26 Jul 2019)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> We subsidize messes and CANEX.  It's a choice to support unhealthy living.
> 
> If we're going to subsidize lifestyle choices, let's support healthy ones, not alcohol, caffeine and nicotine.



I'm with you on the nicotine, but only because smoking affects more than just the smoker and I see nothing beneficial in it - certainly nothing that outweighs the harm.  The same is not true with alcohol, caffeine or even fatty foods.  In moderation there is some benefit to those things and nothing especially harmful.


----------



## cld617 (26 Jul 2019)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> stores selling smokes and *energy drinks*





			
				dapaterson said:
			
		

> let's support healthy ones, not alcohol, *caffeine* and nicotine.



I for one am hugely dissatisfied by the level of opinion often sold as fact in the Forces WRT health and fitness. The above comments are a perfectly example of this, condemning a hugely useful stimulant (which professional athletes regularly rely on) as a hindrance, put on the same level as alcohol and tobacco no less. It's time we let professionals take over, and I don't mean the ex-PERI who thinks sit-ups till you vomit is an effective tool for anything but back problems.


----------



## dapaterson (26 Jul 2019)

In moderation, useful.  Chugging four Monster because you have a terrible sleep cycle, bad.

Lots of negatives with abuse of any stimulant; CANEX employees should not be a source for drugs.


----------



## Brash (26 Jul 2019)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> In moderation, useful.  Chugging four Monster because you have a terrible sleep cycle, bad.



How about the CAF tries something truly revolutionary, like educating members on making healthy choices as adults?
I feel like this would be a more effective solution than trying to implement an ineffectual ban on energy drinks, soda, and cigarettes.
Senior leadership often reaches for the closest virtue-signalling stick they can find, and completely miss the mark.




			
				dapaterson said:
			
		

> Lots of negatives with abuse of any stimulant; CANEX employees should not be a source for drugs.



Agreed. Which is why we should EDUCATE members on health impacts with abuse of a stimulants. (and abuse of food, gambling, non-exercise)

Let's also not reach for the closest blame-stick we can find either. 
CANEX employees are not a source for drugs, just as they are not a source for TVs, computers, or cadpat shaving kits.


----------



## dapaterson (26 Jul 2019)

The CAF can choose to not subsidize unhealthy choices, choose not to profit from it.  But we've gone the other way.

CANEX and messes have outlived their usefulness and reinforce negatives; it's time for change.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (26 Jul 2019)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> The CAF can choose to not subsidize unhealthy choices, choose not to profit from it.  But we've gone the other way.
> 
> CANEX and messes have outlived their usefulness and reinforce negatives; it's time for change.



Yup.  PMQs and subsidised Day Care as well.


----------



## MilEME09 (26 Jul 2019)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> The CAF can choose to not subsidize unhealthy choices, choose not to profit from it.  But we've gone the other way.
> 
> CANEX and messes have outlived their usefulness and reinforce negatives; it's time for change.



As a professional Chef, i always shake my head at messes in the CAF, some are great and seem to put effort into actual cooking of healthy meals, hell I've seen fresh baked bread in Wainwright before, kudo's to them. I've more often then not though seen what amounts to deep fried, or slop prison food which is not nutritionally balanced. Healthy choices starts with institutional change in how we feed our troops, why should we expect our troops to be healthy if we do not even make the healthiest choices for them?

Why do we do it though? convenience, it might take 3 hours to cut and blanch potatoes to feed everyone for a few days, or i can order this frozen bag ready to go. Wan health troops, we need our cooks to actually cook. Back it up with seminars on Nutrition for the troops among other items mentioned above and I am sure we would start seeing a turn around.


----------



## MJP (26 Jul 2019)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> As a professional Chef, it always shake my head at messes in the CAF, some are great and seem to put effort into actual cooking of healthy meals, hell I've seen fresh baked bread in Wainwright before, kudo's to them. I've more often then not though seen what amounts to deep fried, or slop prison food which is not nutritionally balanced. Healthy choices starts with institutional change in how we feed our troops, why should we expect our troops to be healthy if we do not even make the healthiest choices for them?
> 
> Why do we do it though? convenience, it might take 3 hours to cut and blanch potatoes to feed everyone for a few days, or i can order this frozen bag ready to go. Wan health troops, we need our cooks to actually cook. Back it up with seminars on Nutrition for the troops among other items mentioned above and I am sure we would start seeing a turn around.



Some of those troops pay $600+ to eat at that mess and why does the CAF get to choose what they want to put in their body?  Healthy options should be there but no one shoulduld pay that kind of money for someone else to decide what they want to eat.  

To sum up:
Teach nutrition - Yup
Have healthy options - Yup
Tell me what to eat by giving me no choice - frig No


*written as I sit at home eating pizza and chips, while considering if I need a beer or ceaser to start.


----------



## BDTyre (26 Jul 2019)

MJP said:
			
		

> Some of those troops pay $600+ to eat at that mess and why does the CAF get to choose what they want to put in their body?  Healthy options should be there but get if someone would pay that kind of money for someone else to decide what they want to eat.
> 
> To sum up:
> Teach nutrition - Yup
> ...



I remember summer at Edmonton...every day for nearly two months, the hot lunch was spaghetti bolognaise...and nothing else.


----------



## MilEME09 (26 Jul 2019)

CanadianTire said:
			
		

> I remember summer at Edmonton...every day for nearly two months, the hot lunch was spaghetti bolognaise...and nothing else.



Unfortunately recipe development, and imagination seem to lack in CAF kitchens, which saddens me cause I've seen the equipment they have, and the possibilities are endless.


----------



## OldSolduer (27 Jul 2019)

Education is key but it takes time. Don’t expect overnight results.


----------



## MJP (27 Jul 2019)

CanadianTire said:
			
		

> I remember summer at Edmonton...every day for nearly two months, the hot lunch was spaghetti bolognaise...and nothing else.



#thathappened and if it did why would you accept it?

I have been to many messes across the country like most people on the forum and while the menus can get stale, having the same item day in and day out I have never seen (except the a la carte type stuff).



			
				MilEME09 said:
			
		

> Unfortunately recipe development, and imagination seem to lack in CAF kitchens, which saddens me cause I've seen the equipment they have, and the possibilities are endless.



The new national menu has been great IMHO and is a huge improvement over the myriad of local menu development that was going on, although I will admit I don't eat at a mess everyday.  Regardless it will still be institutional prep work and cooking that will happen.  Our cooks are awesome, but feeding lots of people fast means the menu has to be simpler than their abilities and it has to be cost effective.

In true Army.ca fashion #topicdrift


----------



## Edward Campbell (27 Jul 2019)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> The CAF can choose to not subsidize unhealthy choices, choose not to profit from it.  But we've gone the other way.
> 
> CANEX and messes have outlived their usefulness and reinforce negatives; it's time for change.




I'm not sure I agree, in total, but I do think that messes, at least, need a thorough rethink.

Messes began, in the late 18th, early 19th centuries in India and here in Canada, on the frontier, in an effort to give young English gentlemen some semblance of the comforts to which they were accustomed at home. Pubs, of sorts, (often with brothels attached) grew up, quickly, wherever soldiers (and sailors) were based but the officers were, rightly, unwelcome ~ then, as now, officers need a bit of privacy from their subordinates and sailors and soldiers need some (even more?) privacy from the officers (and sergeants) too. I'm going to guess that is still the case, sometimes, but I wonder if our late 19th-century, English club or country-house mess culture is what we need.

I have not been to the CFS Leitrim All Ranks Mess for a few years, but it seemed to work well. Maybe it had something to do with the people there and the work they did ... maybe all-ranks clubs are not the answer for everyone but I'm guessing that they are appropriate in some cases.

I'm even less certain about CANEX. I remember when we didn't have one! The soldiers' 'dry canteen' or local merchants were the only place to buy necessities. We, junior soldiers and married officers and NCOs alike, did really envy our American cousins. I served in a situation where my family and I had both PX and Commissary rights ~ the Americans know how to run a business and how to get what people want and need to them, almost anywhere. CANEX has always struck me as being too close to the British NAAFI ~ we used to call it 'No Ambition And F*ck-all Interest' ~ and too far from the US PX and Commissary. (And yes, I know the Commissary is heavily subsidized by the US taxpayers to make up for less than adequate military pay.)

I was told, _waaaay_ back when, that CANEX was, intentionally, overpriced and poorly stocked in order not to annoy the local (near a base) civilian merchants who voted for the local MP whereas most soldiers voted in their former home ridings/place of ordinary residence.

Maybe this is a separate discussion ... or two.


----------



## CombatDoc (27 Jul 2019)

MJP said:
			
		

> I have been to many messes across the country like most people on the forum and while the menus can get stale, having the same item day in and day out I have never seen (except the a la carte type stuff).
> 
> The new national menu has been great IMHO and is a huge improvement over the myriad of local menu development that was going on, although I will admit I don't eat at a mess everyday.  Regardless it will still be institutional prep work and cooking that will happen.  Our cooks are awesome, but feeding lots of people fast means the menu has to be simpler than their abilities and it has to be cost effective.
> 
> In true Army.ca fashion #topicdrift


+1. The National Standardized Cycle Menu has done exactly what you’ve noted, and provided standardization across the CAF. For those who claim that there are no healthy choices at the mess, this is simply not true, but people do need to still select them. However, I suspect that having a standard menu with limited creativity/flexibility for the cooks has probably lead to some morale +/or retention  issues, as institutional cooking is now >> culinary creativity. #topicdrift


----------



## Navy_Pete (27 Jul 2019)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I have not been to the CFS Leitrim All Ranks Mess for a few years, but it seemed to work well. Maybe it had something to do with the people there and the work they did ... maybe all-ranks clubs are not the answer for everyone but I'm guessing that they are appropriate in some cases.


 ff topic:

Was at CFLRS when they switched over to a combined mess for everyone under training.  They spent a week or two before warning everyone about fighting, and then when it happened, they had the opposite issue.  There was about a dozen new summary trials on the following week for fraternization, and even more for the next few weeks.

Think it happened to coincide with the summer serials of the  officer cadet platoons being in the field, and confined to base on Friday night, so most where there, and the were the normal number of recruit platoons similarly confined. Kind of a perfect storm, but it was pretty funny.


----------



## dimsum (27 Jul 2019)

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> ff topic:
> 
> Was at CFLRS when they switched over to a combined mess for everyone under training.  They spent a week or two before warning everyone about fighting, and then when it happened, they had the opposite issue.  There was about a dozen new summary trials on the following week for fraternization, and even more for the next few weeks.
> 
> Think it happened to coincide with the summer serials of the  officer cadet platoons being in the field, and confined to base on Friday night, so most where there, and the were the normal number of recruit platoons similarly confined. Kind of a perfect storm, but it was pretty funny.



What some RCAF bases have done successfully is have an all-ranks portion of a mess, while keeping the three separate ones as well.  Greenwood does it pretty well (they're located in the same building, on the same floor).  They also have it set up so 2 bartenders could take care of all 4 places, or even 1 bartender and people just order from one place and take it to where they're going.  

In places where multi-crewed aircraft are based (Aurora, Cyclone, Herc, etc) it makes sense b/c when we're away, the crews are socializing together and they're all ranks anyway.  Most of the time aircrew also socialize with the maintainers (depending on squadron) and allowing them to be in one place helps that.

Also, I agree that the Mess topic should be split.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (27 Jul 2019)

Navy_Pete said:
			
		

> ff topic:
> 
> Was at CFLRS when they switched over to a combined mess for everyone under training.  They spent a week or two before warning everyone about fighting, and then when it happened, they had the opposite issue.  There was about a dozen new summary trials on the following week for fraternization, and even more for the next few weeks.
> 
> Think it happened to coincide with the summer serials of the  officer cadet platoons being in the field, and confined to base on Friday night, so most where there, and the were the normal number of recruit platoons similarly confined. Kind of a perfect storm, but it was pretty funny.



I've never understood why members of the profession of arms can't socialize together in a peaceful and respectful manner, irrespective of rank.


----------



## dimsum (27 Jul 2019)

Humphrey Bogart said:
			
		

> I've never understood why members of the profession of arms can't socialize together in a peaceful and respectful manner, irrespective of rank.



Complete WAG here, but from what I've seen it's imposed up, not down in most cases.  NCMs don't want to socialize up (or are hesitant to) until they know the officers, while officers in general do want to socialize with the NCMs in general.  I've never seen any of the stereotypical "officers are too good to socialize with NCMs" mentality in the Navy or especially in the Air Force.  Army may be different :dunno:

If anything, sometimes trade, not rank, divisions are harder to reconcile.  As aircrew, I didn't really work directly with ground crew and so never really got to meet most of them, which is weird since they're 2/3 or more of the squadron.  And that was in a squadron that's known for having aircrew and ground crew on a pretty friendly basis.  

As for messes, the base I was at has tried a few times to combine them.  The rumour is that the associates (yes they're not supposed to have a vote and are only supposed to be a small percentage of the membership, but sometimes it doesn't work that way) didn't want to do so because...tradition?


----------



## FSTO (27 Jul 2019)

I'm glad that the ships at sea have seperate messes. I'm especially glad that the CO is by themselves (unlike the USN where the CO is part of the Wardroom) so that if you have had an unpleasant time with the old man you don't have to look at them during meal time. I'm sure it is the same with the rates and C&PO's. We're trapped with each other enough 24/7 when at sea as it is.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (27 Jul 2019)

Works both ways, FSTO.

We CO's also appreciate not having to go have our meals with the officers on those days where we had to run roughshod over one, or some of them.

In a ship at sea context - and particularly the extended periods with lack of privacy - having separate messes for all three "groups" and the CO in his cabin can become a god send for venting, preventing at times deportment that could border on baratry or mutiny.

But that is a very specific context not found in Army or Air Force bases, or even Naval shore establishments where you can go home at night.

BTW, in all my time in the Navy, be it ashore in Naden or Stad, or at sea, I've never noticed any lack of variety in the food being served. There was always a wide variation from day to day and it was actually pretty good and healthy - both during my time as a seaman and as an officer. Sure, at sea you had some "special" cases such as the weekly steak night or pizza night - but how else were you supposed to keep track of which day it was ???

So, this lack of healthy food or variety of choice, was that an Air Force or Army problem?


----------



## Navy_Pete (27 Jul 2019)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Complete WAG here, but from what I've seen it's imposed up, not down in most cases.  NCMs don't want to socialize up (or are hesitant to) until they know the officers, while officers in general do want to socialize with the NCMs in general.  I've never seen any of the stereotypical "officers are too good to socialize with NCMs" mentality in the Navy or especially in the Air Force.  Army may be different :dunno:



St. Jean is a weird petri dish; there were some platoon staff that had a general dislike for officers and passed that down to their recruits/officer cadets. Normally that lasted until about 30 seconds after you talked, but there will probably always be a few with the chip on their shoulder of 'I work for a living/I'm an officer, I don't have to do that' from either groups.  Think the shared mess in St. Jean was actually good for that, as it let the two groups mingle at the point where there is no subordinate/supervisor relationship, so it's a lot less complicated to have a beer and shoot some pool than when you are both at the same unit.

Think there are pluses and minuses; the weirdroom also has a mix of really junior officers and some more senior and experienced officers, so it's a convenient space where you can talk through things and do some mentoring over a coffee/adult beverage without worrying about making them look dumb in front of people they need to be able to give orders. Similarly gives department heads a space to bash things out without airing all your dirty laundry, and otherwise talk through things, help each other out, and commiserate over shared grievances.

Always a balance between being friendly and being friends with subordinates on a ship; found it easier with people that I sailed with as a trainee, but generally consciously gave folks space as I figured they didn't want to hang with the boss on their time off, so didn't get to know some of them as well. Probably came off as aloof, but didn't want to cramp their style.  Wonder how many times that gets mistaken for an attitude of 'too good to spend time with the troops'. There are a lot of people I was responsible for that I would have been glad to consider friends, but never really got to know them well enough as a result.

 Found support/HQ jobs quite different in that respect, as it's a more casual relationship with smaller teams, so the social aspect is less complicated than at an operational unit. Also less crushing levels of responsibility than a ship, so a lot more time to properly take care of all your people and get to know them better.


----------



## FSTO (27 Jul 2019)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> *Works both ways, FSTO.*
> 
> We CO's also appreciate not having to go have our meals with the officers on those days where we had to run roughshod over one, or some of them.
> 
> ...



Oh I can recall a few times where the CO left the bridge or Ops to go to their cabin and figuratively scream into the pillow!


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (27 Jul 2019)

"Figuratively" ?

You have no idea what a blessing it is to have a good steward, as there are usually no Padre around to confess thoughts of murder !!!

 ;D


----------

