# Postings, career managers and budget cuts!



## JBP (2 Apr 2014)

So my chain of command just advised us that the career managers have basically had their budgets slashed for postings, even more than expected and don't be surprised if most cost postings are cancelled as the posting plot is shot to hell... 

Anyone have any numbers or substantiation? 

Is it as bad as it sounds?


----------



## PuckChaser (2 Apr 2014)

Rumint indicates Veh Tech was cut by 75%, Comm Rsch only has money for OUTCAN cycling.

I got told good luck for Sigs getting down to Pri 3 (career progression postings).


----------



## Transporter (2 Apr 2014)

I don't have numbers but other than being able to fund the mandatory moves i.e. initial postings off trade training, OUTCAN, etc, it's pretty bleak... or as a particular CM stated in an email to me today, "it's ridiculous".


----------



## Tibbson (3 Apr 2014)

Only thing certain for us is outcan postings and "across the street" no cost moves between Units within a base.  There will no doubt be a few cost moves but we are expecting them to be as minimal as minimal can be.  We've even been told that if someone is promoted, lets say to WO and that base only has one WO position is my trade, the new WO may vary well be kept in his/her location over ranked in the same Sgts position they just got promoted out of.  We've got a couple of locations down 25% due to releases and even they have been told they may not be topped up.

Sad fact is, it will be painful for this year but what will happen next year when those that will be put off will be added to NEW requirements for postings that will go unfilled.  I sense a HUGE bottleneck starting this year.


----------



## DAA (3 Apr 2014)

I don't think promoting and employing "over ranked" is even going to be considered, with the exception of possible 31 Dec promotions but even that is up in the air.

I did hear a number a few months ago and the comment made was something along the lines of "roughly 2,500 CF wide", so I sort of just ignored that thinking it to be a tad bit too low.

Other than that, the last I heard was that CM's would not have a confirmed cost move budget until sometime around mid-Apr and would then be able to tweak the posting plots to fall in line with the cost move allocations.


----------



## Eye In The Sky (3 Apr 2014)

It is going to be hard for some people, with last posting messages and less time to get homes on the market, etc.

I heard SP slots will get funded first, then "the rest".


----------



## Tibbson (3 Apr 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> I don't think promoting and employing "over ranked" is even going to be considered, with the exception of possible 31 Dec promotions but even that is up in the air.
> 
> I did hear a number a few months ago and the comment made was something along the lines of "roughly 2,500 CF wide", so I sort of just ignored that thinking it to be a tad bit too low.
> 
> Other than that, the last I heard was that CM's would not have a confirmed cost move budget until sometime around mid-Apr and would then be able to tweak the posting plots to fall in line with the cost move allocations.



Well I watched a Unit gain a second WO just yesterday and they only have a position for one.   We were told both were staying for at least a year.  

Me thinks it's not going to be pretty.


----------



## DAA (3 Apr 2014)

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> Well I watched a Unit gain a second WO just yesterday and they only have a position for one.   We were told both were staying for at least a year.
> 
> Me thinks it's not going to be pretty.



Ouch, that's just nasty.  Try and write that PER next year.  WO X was employed in a Sgt's positions.............


----------



## garb811 (3 Apr 2014)

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> Only thing certain for us is outcan postings and "across the street" no cost moves between Units within a base.  There will no doubt be a few cost moves but we are expecting them to be as minimal as minimal can be.  We've even been told that if someone is promoted, lets say to WO and that base only has one WO position is my trade, the new WO may vary well be kept in his/her location over ranked in the same Sgts position they just got promoted out of.  We've got a couple of locations down 25% due to releases and even they have been told they may not be topped up.
> 
> Sad fact is, it will be painful for this year but what will happen next year when those that will be put off will be added to NEW requirements for postings that will go unfilled.  I sense a HUGE bottleneck starting this year.


I can confirm this.  MP CM has more flexibility than other CMs due to the number of OUTCAN postings we have so he can use people coming back in from OUTCAN to fill positions where possible, but that only goes so far.  He has given warning that promoted and staying over-ranked is going to be quite common this year due to our promotion forecast and expected cuts to his move budget.



> Ouch, that's just nasty.  Try and write that PER next year.  WO X was employed in a Sgt's positions.............


Yep, not to mention that there is going to be a monetary hit to the member as well because they are going to be deferred until December.  

Units are going to suffer as well due to key leadership positions being unfilled as a result.


----------



## Tibbson (3 Apr 2014)

garb811 said:
			
		

> I can confirm this.  MP CM has more flexibility than other CMs due to the number of OUTCAN postings we have so he can use people coming back in from OUTCAN to fill positions where possible, but that only goes so far.  He has given warning that promoted and staying over-ranked is going to be quite common this year due to our promotion forecast and expected cuts to his move budget.
> Yep, not to mention that there is going to be a monetary hit to the member as well because they are going to be deferred until December.
> 
> Units are going to suffer as well due to key leadership positions being unfilled as a result.



And that is what the CM is doing now, trying to maximize the potential for those OUTCAN postings being paid for by DFAIT.  One goes out "for free" and one comes back "for free" and can be directed, "for free", to the base where the MP is needed.  That will make things a bit easier but given the Branch's promotion forecast, anticipated releases and other factors, you couldn't pay me enough to be a CM.   Its like playing a big game of chess but you can only move a third of your pieces.


----------



## Navy_Pete (3 Apr 2014)

I was told in December to expect there will be a number of holes in our org chart after the posting season.  There will probably only be a very limited backfill of our spots left vacant from folks going back to ships, so we can expect to do your job plus portions of other jobs under a 'matrix'.  So seeing as I'm now up to about 1.7 out of 1 in the matrix, going to be interesting.

Would be pretty awful though to be merit listed to go back and have that get delayed because of lack of money for a cost move, particularly as for NTOs it's now nearly impossible to get promoted without the HOD tour.  So in theory, you could have someone behind you that avoided coming to the NCR jump ahead of you and get promoted sooner because of it.  Pretty sweet reward for hard work!  Don't think it'll come to that though; more likely they will cut the PG related moves for us first.  Not impossible though; things are pretty much a hot mess.


----------



## garb811 (3 Apr 2014)

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> ... anticipated releases...



Biggest problem is the unanticipated releases of personnel in key positions.  Other years they had the opportunity to adjust by requesting additional moves.  This year, once the moves are gone chances of getting even one additional move to fill a key position is going to be slim to none.


----------



## Tibbson (3 Apr 2014)

garb811 said:
			
		

> Biggest problem is the unanticipated releases of personnel in key positions.  Other years they had the opportunity to adjust by requesting additional moves.  This year, once the moves are gone chances of getting even one additional move to fill a key position is going to be slim to none.



And to make things even MORE interesting, what about the additional unanticipated releases as people say "here we go again" and choose to find a new employer of choice?   If someone doesn't want to ride this out, more power to 'em, but it just means more holes to fill with.....well, nothing.


----------



## Dipstick (4 Apr 2014)

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> Well I watched a Unit gain a second WO just yesterday and they only have a position for one.   We were told both were staying for at least a year.
> 
> Me thinks it's not going to be pretty.



I was replaced months ago. Same billet, only one of us required in a unit. I have yet to be posted. I've literally had no job for almost 4 months while they try to figure out a plan, and the more I look around, the more clear it becomes that I'm not alone.

Me thinks it's already not pretty.


----------



## Old EO Tech (4 Apr 2014)

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> And to make things even MORE interesting, what about the additional unanticipated releases as people say "here we go again" and choose to find a new employer of choice?   If someone doesn't want to ride this out, more power to 'em, but it just means more holes to fill with.....well, nothing.



It's already hard out west(Edmonton, Cold Lake etc) as we are bleeding people to the economy already.  The normal top up of postings would just put us in the manageable range.  Now all we are looking at in Edmonton(RCEME Corp) is no cost moves/promotions, and taking inexperienced Cpl's right out of the OJT program and putting them in places we would have only put senior Cpls in before.  Good thing we are moving out of HR this year...and hopefully mother nature lays off the Dom Ops :-/  It's bad enough with the B fleet reduction making every remaining truck a priority, now we won't have any depth in our personnel side either....


----------



## CountDC (4 Apr 2014)

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> And that is what the CM is doing now, trying to maximize the potential for those OUTCAN postings being paid for by DFAIT.  One goes out "for free" and one comes back "for free" and can be directed, "for free", to the base where the MP is needed.  That will make things a bit easier but given the Branch's promotion forecast, anticipated releases and other factors, you couldn't pay me enough to be a CM.   Its like playing a big game of chess but you can only move a third of your pieces.



I wouldn't want to be the CM either as it is not quite as easy as for free.  These postings are on a recovery process based on the CFM which means that at first the money comes out of the CF budget, we bill DFAIT for it and when the payment comes in from them deposit the funds into the CF receiving account.  if a certain move costs more than the CFM amount then it is a loss to the CF.  The CM will have the fun of getting the purse string holders to understand how the process works so that they do not block these postings or count them towards his move budget as part of the cuts.  Then there is the question of where does the DFAIT budget sit?  WIth our budget cut did they also have one that could affect our postings?  Certain individual MOUs did stipulate tour lengths of one year but the MP one is a large bulk one in various locations that may have prevented them from including minimum/maximum length.  Regardless the CM is not going to have fun this year.    Hmmm - now that I think of it maybe I am glad that I am not sitting in my old job dealing with this stuff.


----------



## garb811 (4 Apr 2014)

The MOU stipulates 2+1+1 for the majority of MPSS postings with select ones being 1 year.


----------



## Tibbson (4 Apr 2014)

garb811 said:
			
		

> The MOU stipulates 2+1+1 for the majority of MPSS postings with select ones being 1 year.



Yes and it's also on DFAITs dime.  I've been told that while it's a military Unit it's under DFAIT.  That came about when the guys were bitching, as it's every soldiers right to do, about some of the more drastic and less glamorous posts and how they wished there was a medal or an MPSS bar for the SSM.  (Don't get your knickers in a knot, like I said, everyone has the right to bitch)  Apparently someone had made inquiries and were told that because they were seconded to DFAIT it would be up to DFAIT to make the submission to DHH for the creation of something.  Anyway, the no cost MPSS moves, both into and out of Canada, are at least one luxury that CM has that others don't but I still wouldn't want his job.


----------



## DAA (4 Apr 2014)

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> Yes and it's also on DFAITs dime.  I've been told that while it's a military Unit it's under DFAIT.  That came about when the guys were bitching, as it's every soldiers right to do, about some of the more drastic and less glamorous posts and how they wished there was a medal or an MPSS bar for the SSM.  (Don't get your knickers in a knot, like I said, everyone has the right to *****)  Apparently someone had made inquiries and were told that because they were seconded to DFAIT it would be up to DFAIT to make the submission to DHH for the creation of something.  Anyway, the no cost MPSS moves, both into and out of Canada, are at least one luxury that CM has that others don't but I still wouldn't want his job.



Keep in mind, the key word that you have used.... "seconded".  If my memory serves me correct, these are by no means a guaranteed "no cost move" to the CM but rather the cost borne by DFATD is based on assignment from Ottawa to the respective post and the same goes on return.  So where the CF member is currently posted from and then to, can and probably does impact on that.  Someone going from Edmonton to say China, would probably be no cost to the CM.  But someone going from Edmonton to Moscow, would probably incur a cost to DND.

So technically, the costing method used by DFATD for assignment outcan for MPSS pers, would be based on a relocation originating from Ottawa.


----------



## garb811 (4 Apr 2014)

A move is a move is a move.  Just like the CM is budgeted "x" number of cost moves within Canada and it doesn't matter if that move is from Halifax to Greenwood or from Halifax to Comox, it still counts as "1" move, the same is true for moves to and from MPSS.  The biggest cost on OUTCAN moves is the stuff related to the international move.  Shipping a sea can from Vancouver to Petawawa instead of Edmonton is peanuts compared to the cost of getting it from New Dehli to Vancouver in the first place.

Having said that, DFAITD does impose some restrictions.  ie. Unless the member is forced to secure their own accommodations, DFAITD won't authorize a CAF member to attend the post prior to their COS date, so while a member going to MPSS is technically authorized a DIT as a minimum IAW CFIRP, it will never happen even though CAF pers posted to the Attache program do it (or at least they did not so long ago) all the time.

Useless trivia time:  My first Embassy, the move to the Embassy was conducted IAW CF move policies, the move back was IAW DFAITs.  Going over I flew economy class via milk run courtesy of the Orderly Room.  Coming home, my HHT and move were Business Class because I was able to secure the tickets at less than full fare economy...


----------



## Tibbson (4 Apr 2014)

DAA said:
			
		

> Keep in mind, the key word that you have used.... "seconded".  If my memory serves me correct, these are by no means a guaranteed "no cost move" to the CM but rather the cost borne by DFATD is based on assignment from Ottawa to the respective post and the same goes on return.  So where the CF member is currently posted from and then to, can and probably does impact on that.  Someone going from Edmonton to say China, would probably be no cost to the CM.  But someone going from Edmonton to Moscow, would probably incur a cost to DND.
> 
> So technically, the costing method used by DFATD for assignment outcan for MPSS pers, would be based on a relocation originating from Ottawa.



Based upon my own posting experience with MPSS and numerous conversations with the CoC and MP CM I'm certain that is not the case but I'll leave it as an "agree to disagree" point since it won't get solved here and is really a moot point WRT the main topic.


----------



## DAA (4 Apr 2014)

garb811 said:
			
		

> A move is a move is a move.  Just like the CM is budgeted "x" number of cost moves within Canada and it doesn't matter if that move is from Halifax to Greenwood or from Halifax to Comox, it still counts as "1" move, the same is true for moves to and from MPSS.  The biggest cost on OUTCAN moves is the stuff related to the international move.  Shipping a sea can from Vancouver to Petawawa instead of Edmonton is peanuts compared to the cost of getting it from New Dehli to Vancouver in the first place.
> 
> Having said that, DFAITD does impose some restrictions.  ie. Unless the member is forced to secure their own accommodations, DFAITD won't authorize a CAF member to attend the post prior to their COS date, so while a member going to MPSS is technically authorized a DIT as a minimum IAW CFIRP, it will never happen even though CAF pers posted to the Attache program do it (or at least they did not so long ago) all the time.
> 
> Useless trivia time:  My first Embassy, the move to the Embassy was conducted IAW CF move policies, the move back was IAW DFAITs.  Going over I flew economy class via milk run courtesy of the Orderly Room.  Coming home, my HHT and move were Business Class because I was able to secure the tickets at less than full fare economy...





			
				Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> Based upon my own posting experience with MPSS and numerous conversations with the CoC and MP CM I'm certain that is not the case but I'll leave it as an "agree to disagree" point since it won't get solved here and is really a moot point WRT the main topic.



The moves for your guys, is a dirty murky world and difficult at best to understand and a nightmare at worst.  It ends up with bickering and fighting over the contents of the MOU and differences in departmental regulations.

The CM's get their money and then based on CFM numbers, it equates to moves.  Doesn't really help the cost, because there is no one that can sit down and acutally reliably put a reasonably hard "cost" to such a move.  So the CM could be very diligent and try to maximize things but at the end of the day, if they come up with a surplus, it really does no one any benefit, because it is too late.


----------

