Leave Administration - Op LASER

[stellarpanther]

How did you lose your leave?

So for example, Bob and Jim both get 25 days a year.  Bob uses all his leave before end of Feb so he's happy. Jim puts in a leave pass to use 3 weeks of annual so he can go to Alberta to visit family but is instead told we don't need you to work right now so you are still on leave but you can't visit your family now and need to stay within 250km of your home but wait, Jim is told a couple days later don't leave your room unless going for a walk or you need to get essential items. Meanwhile, Bob is also off sitting in his room but at least he didn't need to use his vacation to do that. 
People can say life isn't fair all they want and they'd be right but it doesn't have to be that way. It doesn't mean people are wrong or selfish because they speak up.  The CDS could issue an order allowing mbr's to accumulate those days or direct units to grant CTO or Special when this is over for the amount of days the member had available to be used within a certain time period.  If they wanted to piss people off this is one way to do it.

 

[dapaterson]

The CDS could issue an order allowing mbr's to accumulate those days or direct units to grant CTO or Special when this is over for the amount of days the member had available to be used within a certain time period.

A quick point on this.  The CDS has much less power than many people think.  The CDS is bound by the QR&O restriction on leave accumulation and cannot of his own authority override it.

If you read a QR&O article, at the end of each one there's a letter - a (G), (T), (M) or (C), which stand for Governor in Council; Treasury Board; Minister; and CDS.  That letter shows under whose authority that QR&O was issued.  And that list is hierarchical - an authority later on that list cannot override one that's higher.

In the case of QR&O chapter 16, all the articles are issued under the authority of the MND.  The MND's authority to make such regulations is derived from the National Defence Act 12(2), under his authority to make regulations for the administration of the CAF (subject to any regulations made by the Governor in Council).  Thus any change to leave policy would come not from the CDS, but from the MND. 

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/corporate/policies-standards/queens-regulations-orders/vol-1-administration/ch-16-leave.html

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/n-5/FullText.html

 

[MJP]

So for example, Bob and Jim both get 25 days a year.  Bob uses all his leave before end of Feb so he's happy. Jim puts in a leave pass to use 3 weeks of annual so he can go to Alberta to visit family but is instead told we don't need you to work right now so you are still on leave but you can't visit your family now and need to stay within 250km of your home but wait, Jim is told a couple days later don't leave your room unless going for a walk or you need to get essential items. Meanwhile, Bob is also off sitting in his room but at least he didn't need to use his vacation to do that. 
People can say life isn't fair all they want and they'd be right but it doesn't have to be that way. It doesn't mean people are wrong or selfish because they speak up.  The CDS could issue an order allowing mbr's to accumulate those days or direct units to grant CTO or Special when this is over for the amount of days the member had available to be used within a certain time period.  If they wanted to piss people off this is one way to do it.

So to summarize,  there is no lost leave here,  just an unlucky circumstance that no one could have predicted.  Unfortunate yes,  unlucky yes,  unfair no. 

 

[stellarpanther]

A quick point on this.  The CDS has much less power than many people think.  The CDS is bound by the QR&O restriction on leave accumulation and cannot of his own authority override it.

If you read a QR&O article, at the end of each one there's a letter - a (G), (T), (M) or (C), which stand for Governor in Council; Treasury Board; Minister; and CDS.  That letter shows under whose authority that QR&O was issued.  And that list is hierarchical - an authority later on that list cannot override one that's higher.

In the case of QR&O chapter 16, all the articles are issued under the authority of the MND.  The MND's authority to make such regulations is derived from the National Defence Act 12(2), under his authority to make regulations for the administration of the CAF (subject to any regulations made by the Governor in Council).  Thus any change to leave policy would come not from the CDS, but from the MND. 

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/corporate/policies-standards/queens-regulations-orders/vol-1-administration/ch-16-leave.html

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/n-5/FullText.html

Would he have authority to direct CO's to grant or be very flexible in granting several short days for the next little while once this is over for mbr's who were affected by this? I'm even wondering out loud if the MND would entertain the idea of looking at this issue. Most mbr's are dedicated to their job but leave and pay are the two most important things I see from mbr's when they come to the OR for something.

 

[dapaterson]

CDS can give orders within the authorities he holds.  The challenge of course is that there is never a one size fits all solution.  Right now, pilots, technicians and SAR techs are maintaining their normal duty rosters while also isolating, while many other CAF members are merely isolating at home.  "Give everyone two days short every month!" might look good at first blush, but what would that mean to SAR squadrons, for example?

Large complex organizations often create what are referred to as "wicked problems".  Wikipedia has a pretty good description.

In planning and policy, a wicked problem is a problem that is difficult or impossible to solve because of incomplete, contradictory, and changing requirements that are often difficult to recognize. It refers to an idea or problem that cannot be fixed, where there is no single solution to the problem; and "wicked" denotes resistance to resolution, rather than evil.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem

 

[stellarpanther]

So to summarize,  there is no lost leave here,  just an unlucky circumstance that no one could have predicted.  Unfortunate yes,  unlucky yes,  unfair no.

To summarize, yes there is lost leave and yes it is unfair.  It is unfair if two people are told they are to stay home and 1 stays home and doesn't need to use annual leave but another person does just because they decided to take their leave at a later date in the FY which is allowed.
I'm wondering if some of the people who are justifying it are actually in the Reg F and the reason I am saying that is because I have yet to see a mbr not complain about leave when they feel they were wronged.  It's the same with pay, people will take an hour or two off work to go to the OR to question why their pay was off by a dollar, I'm not making that up, I've seen it several times.  I've had several mbr's over the years question why PeopleSoft or Guardian hasn't updated there leave to 25 or 30 days on the same day they become entitled and will hound the clerks until the system switches it over automatically.

 

[Infanteer]

To summarize, yes there is lost leave and yes it is unfair.  It is unfair if two people are told they are to stay home and 1 stays home and doesn't need to use annual leave but another person does just because they decided to take their leave at a later date in the FY which is allowed.

Well that may be what the stellarpantherFORGEN says, but not the CANFORGEN, and only one applies to CAF members.

 

[stellarpanther]

Well that may be what the stellarpantherFORGEN says, but not the CANFORGEN, and only one applies to CAF members.

Is that the best you can do?  How about a real answer that actually addresses what I posted.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Some people get lucky and some dont

 

[MJP]

To summarize, yes there is lost leave and yes it is unfair.  It is unfair if two people are told they are to stay home and 1 stays home and doesn't need to use annual leave but another person does just because they decided to take their leave at a later date in the FY which is allowed.
I'm wondering if some of the people who are justifying it are actually in the Reg F and the reason I am saying that is because I have yet to see a mbr not complain about leave when they feel they were wronged.  It's the same with pay, people will take an hour or two off work to go to the OR to question why their pay was off by a dollar, I'm not making that up, I've seen it several times.  I've had several mbr's over the years question why PeopleSoft or Guardian hasn't updated there leave to 25 or 30 days on the same day they become entitled and will hound the clerks until the system switches it over automatically.

My experience is that is it's generally only a small  percentage of people making this a real issue.  For example my team and I run the admin for a very large Reg F CA unit.  This entire issue came up as we entered block leave as well as had a number of folks return from overseas missions and go on post deployment leave including burning the remainder of their annual leave. 

Out of the unit we had two or three people raise issues formally,  a few more seeking clarification (testing the waters so to speak) but for the most part people understand that there is no real unfairness at play here.  I have no doubt there are more that feel a bit slighted but generally people are approaching this rationally and reasonably. 

I agree with the CDS and disagree with you, having to go on leave ATT is unlucky but not unfair. 

 

[Infanteer]

Is that the best you can do?  How about a real answer that actually addresses what I posted.

There isn't much more to be said that hasn't been said already.  Essentially, there is an unprecedented national emergency going on, with people dying and others facing economic ruin.  The entire military has seen its normal business practice overturned like never before, and has been substantially mobilized to conduct domestic operations.  In light of this unprecedented situation, the senior leaders of the CAF have had to manage completely new problems, to include managing the complete disruption of the APS of 10,000+ members, conducting the deployment of forces in and out of foreign theatres during a global pandemic, and unravelling the fiscal realities of shutting down normal business and leaving money in the account two weeks before the end of the normal fiscal year.

In view of all of this, some folks (I count myself here) still had leave remaining for the final 15 days of a 365 day fiscal year, and didn't get to use it as we may have liked.  The CDS had to make a call, and deemed it unlucky, but not unfair, because nothing says thou shalt only use annual leave if its in a manner of your choosing.  Such is life.

So yeah, when you compare all of the above to the fact that you are butthurt about spending 3 or 4 days of leave at home instead of where you wanted to be, that is the best I can do....

 

[Jarnhamar]

So for example, Bob and Jim both get 25 days a year.  Bob uses all his leave before end of Feb so he's happy.

Oh ya. I see what you mean. I definitely took after Bob and started the partying early too.

 

[PuckChaser]

So in this scenario, did Jim put the Alberta address on the leave pass? Did Jim book a flight or plan to drive? At the end of the day, if Jim didn't purchase train/plane/bus tickets, what has he lost? Literally only the ability to visit his family, which every other Canadian has lost right now.

 

[stellarpanther]

So yeah, when you compare all of the above to the fact that you are butthurt about spending 3 or 4 days of leave at home instead of where you wanted to be, that is the best I can do....

It's one thing when it's a few days but something else when it's the majority of your annual leave.  While annual leave isn't the priority right now, perhaps it would have been better to put it aside and say it will be addressed at a later date.  Being forced to take your leave and told you need to spend it sitting in your house is not the intent of annual leave as per the Leave Policy Manual and considering the intent of a policy is what is normally followed, I'll go with that.  I've been wrong before but I can see this being revisited once things calm down.

 

[stellarpanther]

So in this scenario, did Jim put the Alberta address on the leave pass? Did Jim book a flight or plan to drive? At the end of the day, if Jim didn't purchase train/plane/bus tickets, what has he lost? Literally only the ability to visit his family, which every other Canadian has lost right now.

Jim did put an Alberta address on the leave pass and purchased a plane ticket prior to leave being changed.  Several mbr's are in the same situation.  If Jim or anyone else had their home address down, I would see no problem with using up the annual leave because they would have spent the leave where they said they wanted to spend it.

 

[PuckChaser]

So Jim should be reimbursed based on the CANFORGEN and request to accumulate the leave because the intent was shown to travel based on address on leave pass. That's right out of the CANFORGEN. If the CO denies the request, submit a notice of intent to grieve.

 

[BeyondTheNow]

It's one thing when it's a few days but something else when it's the majority of your annual leave.  While annual leave isn't the priority right now, perhaps it would have been better to put it aside and say it will be addressed at a later date.  Being forced to take your leave and told you need to spend it sitting in your house is not the intent of annual leave as per the Leave Policy Manual and considering the intent of a policy is what is normally followed, I'll go with that.  I've been wrong before but I can see this being revisited once things calm down.

Out of curiosity, are you actually personally and greatly affected by this scenario—as in you ended up losing several days worth of annual (not just a couple), or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing an issue that the rest of us have managed to process, accept and deal with because it’s the way it is?

You’ve said more than once that you understand that life isn’t “fair”, but obviously you don’t or this wouldn’t be such an issue for you. It has been explained in more ways and by more people than should be needed for the average member. The CDS’s release wrt the matter was appropriately balanced and articulated. I worked over 25yrs civvie side and what I have right now is damn good, any lost leave or not.

 

[stellarpanther]

Out of curiosity, are you actually personally and greatly affected by this scenario—as in you ended up losing several days worth of annual (not just a couple), or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing an issue that the rest of us have managed to process, accept and deal with because it’s the way it is?

You’ve said more than once that you understand that life isn’t “fair”, but obviously you don’t or this wouldn’t be such an issue for you. It has been explained in more ways and by more people than should be needed for the average member. The CDS’s release wrt the matter was appropriately balanced and articulated. I worked over 25yrs civvie side and what I have right now is damn good, any lost leave or not.

I lost 17 days.

 

[MJP]

So Jim should be reimbursed based on the CANFORGEN and request to accumulate the leave because the intent was shown to travel based on address on leave pass. That's right out of the CANFORGEN. If the CO denies the request, submit a notice of intent to grieve.

Reimbursement yes.  Accumulation of leave no, they still could go on leave, just not where they wanted like all members of the CAF.  Unlucky yes,  shitty yes,  unfair no. Unfair would be treating them differently than anyone else in the CAF.  Except in certain rarer circumstances no one made Billy Bob wait until the end of the FY to take their leave. 

Those certain circumstances are the maneuver space CoCs should be focusing on, not people who waited until the end of the year.

People in every job generally can be told to use their vacation time by their employer within limits.  Again we are not special in that regard.

I lost 17 days.

You didn't lose them... you could not use them the way you wanted.  Again unlucky,  not unfair

 

[Jarnhamar]

I lost 17 days.

Does that mean you worked through Christmas or summer block leave last year?