• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Help "translating" offer letter

acooper

Jr. Member
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
60
Greetings!
My husband just received an offer letter for OT/CT to GeoTech. He's having a hard time getting internet access up at Meaford (he's deployed as part of Op Cadence). Could I private message someone some of the details? It's all military speak to me, and I don't really understand what it's saying, especially regarding pay, and when he has to be where...
 
If you haven't already gotten your answers - I can help.  Please sanitize the letter, remove his Service Number and his name.  I just need to see the other details.
 
Thanks to those who have helped so far. Turns out my husband WAS able to get internet access tonight, and was able to print the letter. He's getting "translations" from folks up at Meaford, too.

If we do decide to accept the offer, what a summer we're in for! I can't imagine having the house packed up and ready to move (much less find a new place!) by July 16!
 
Acooper:

Don't panic ;D More than likely he will proceed on imposed restriction to his new place of duty for July 16th. Once there, he will secure accomodations. Once accomodations are secured for your family, he will ask his CoC to lift the restriction which they will probably do seeing as the course for Geo Tech is close to two years (I think?). Only THEN will you move. When you think of it, it is the best way to proceed, since that will all give you some breathing room to pack and deal with the big change.

In any case, congrats!
 
Glad to hear your husband is heading out this way...

As for his VOT to GEOMAT TECH...I sought clarification wrt to the Acceptance Offer's section on pay.
Apparently, if your husband is receiving SPEC pay on his COS day he will get bumped down to Standard Pay until QL5 qualified (approx 2 years later).

This brings me to this thread hi-jack (that may be of interest to your hubby if he falls into the former category):

Apprx 2 months ago quite a few of us noticed some sort of calculation at the end of our pay stubs. This quantity varied depending on how much time we had in rank.  Our SOR informed us that there was a miscalculation in determining backpay of time in rank as a Cpl but NOT QL5 qualified.  However, this would fly in the face of the pay directive that happened approx 2004? where prior to this unqualified Cpl's waiting to become QL5 qualified in a Spec Pay Trade were eligible for this pay rate and it was determined that from then on until fully qualified (regardless of training backlogs/security clearance waits/ etc.) you were ineligible.

Since then, we were looking for a very elusive (possible non-existent) pay directive/CANFORGEN that would supersede the ruling that happed back in 04 affecting those of us VOTing from a Spec Trade and QL5 qualified to another. 

Could anyone shed any light on this or was it purely an administrative mistake?  If there is a new pay policy that will be promulgated in the near future  -  does anyone have any insight if this will benefit those of us already Spec Pay QL5 qualified VOTing to another Spec Pay trade with the hopes of backpay on completion of trade-training?

Thanks in advance to all.

 
Thanks for the clarification on spec pay - we honestly hadn't been sure if he qualified for it yet. TBH, though, even the standard pay is craptons better than he could make working full time in Windsor. The difference is, I'll likely be looking for a job up there, unless we get a crazy good deal on a house. As it is, I may stay here in Windsor for a while - I have a good full time job w/ the county gov't, and we may have a hard time selling the house.
 
vojnik said:
does anyone have any insight if this will benefit those of us already Spec Pay QL5 qualified VOTing to another Spec Pay trade with the hopes of backpay on completion of trade-training?

If what is going on with guys doing an OT to my trade from another spec MOC, you lose your spec pay until you meet the requirements in the new MOC and there is no backdating of anything.

I have to admit, i am wondering why you would expect backpay.
 
CDNAviator:

Thanks for the response.  That was the official answer we got from the DGCB.

However, where the confusion was the sheer amount of personnel at my current place of work that received payments of what they would have earned if Spec qualified alledgedlyy calculated on the difference between the day they became QL5 qualified (Spec) and the day they became a Cpl/LS.  This would suggest some sort of "back payment"  ??? ?

  I even spoke with our SOR Clerk and he showed me the corrections to the official quotes that were showing up on lots of our pay cheques (prompting some to make impluse  purchases and part with this money that was determined later to be an overpayment!).  He was simply going by our graduation date and subtracting the amount of days as a Standard Pay Cpl/LS....

I was hoping to get some sort of paper-trail on how/why/where this came from?  If this was something pending and applied to future non-QL5 trained Cpls awaiting or in-training that would really be awesome (fingers crossed but not holding my breath).

  The clerks were busy sorting this out with the beancounters downtown and I didn't want to bother them at the time.



 
vojnik said:
CDNAviator:

Thanks for the response.  That was the official answer we got from the DGCB.

However, where the confusion was the sheer amount of personnel at my current place of work that received payments of what they would have earned if Spec qualified alledgedlyy calculated on the difference between the day they became QL5 qualified (Spec) and the day they became a Cpl/LS.  This would suggest some sort of "back payment"  ??? ?

 

I have 3 of my troops who have recently had their pay clawed back because they had been paid spec when they were not entitled to it. They all came from other spec MOCs.

They were not qualified in the new MOC for spec pay. Their entitlement started the day they met the criteria. What they were before is irrelevant.
 
Back
Top