Leave Without Pay

[MissMercury]

Childfree single member with over 17 years of service needing a break for personal and health reasons. CoC denied LWOP request stating that the policy is only for parental reasons or education. Are childfree members not entitled to request LWOP for personal reasons?

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Chapter 8 – Leave Without Pay and Allowances​

Section 8.1 Leave Without Pay and Allowances​

8.1.01 Purpose​

The purpose of Leave Without Pay and Allowances (hereafter referred to as LWOP) is to allow members the opportunity to remain in the CF during periods when no service is rendered. Except on enrolment, members must request LWOP. The reason for the LWOP must be in the interest of the CF.

8.1.02 Limitations​

Except when LWOP is granted for maternity or parental leave purposes, LWOP shall not be granted:

• in a member's final year of service, except for an OCdt under the ROTP who requests a voluntary release as per CFAO 9-12; or
• until all annual and accumulated leave entitlements are used for the same purpose for which the LWOP is requested.

8.1.03 Reckoning Time​

LWOP is reckoned in calendar days.

8.1.04 Approving Authority (amended 24 June 19)​

The table below summarizes the approving authorities for granting LWOP:

IF LWOP is intended for the purpose of...	THEN it may be granted to...	BY the...
Maternity Leave or Parental Leave	Regular Force members or Reserve Force members on Class B or C Reserve Service (Refer to paragraph 8.2.01 for guidance if situation is Class A service)	CO in accordance with: QR&O 16.26, Maternity Leave; QR&O 16.27, Parental Leave; and/or DAOD 5001-2, Maternity and Parental Benefits
Personal Reasons for parental purposes	Regular Force members or Reserve Force members on Class "B" or "C" Reserve Service (Refer to paragraph 8.2.01 for guidance if situation is Class “A” service)	CO for up to 26 weeks for members requesting the extended parental benefits option offered in the Employment Insurance Act in conjunction with QR&O 16.27, Parental Leave
Spousal Accompaniment (see Note 1)	Members of a CF service couple to accompany their spouses on posting	Director General Military Careers (DGMC) for a maximum of 4 cumulative years at any one time.
On Enrolment	Enrollees to the Regular Force	CO of a CF Recruiting Unit for a period of up to 21 days; or Commander of the Canadian Forces Recruiting Group (CFRG) for a period in excess of 21 days.
Academic, Technical or Subsidized Training, or Personal Reasons	Regular Force members	CO for up to 14 days; OCC for up to 30 days, including the LWOP already granted by the CO; and DGMC for applications in excess of 30 days. Applications must be submitted with a recommendation from the CO and OCC.

Note:
1. Members granted LWOP for spousal accompaniment with a service spouse shall be posted to UIC 9917 with a secondary UIC of the unit supporting the member during the period of LWOP.

8.1.05 Application Process​

Except for new enrollees, who shall have LWOP documented on a CF 100 and members requesting LWOP for maternity or parental reasons, an application for LWOP shall be made on the application form at Annex A.
Members applying for maternity and parental benefits must complete form DND 2268, Application Form for Maternity/Parental Benefits.

8.1.06 Points to Consider​

Before recommending or approving any period of LWOP, the following points should be considered:

• the reason for the LWOP;
• whether the CF can forego the services of the member for the period of LWOP;
• whether there are better alternatives to achieve the aim;
• the performance and conduct of the member;
• whether there will be significant periods during the term of LWOP when the member, upon request, could be returned to duty;
• whether the period of LWOP should be counted for promotion purposes with reference to CFAO 11-6, Commissioning and Promotion Policy-Officers-Regular Force or CFAO 49-4, Career Policy Non-Commissioned Members Regular Force;
• whether or not the requirements of DAOD 5019-8, Private Debts, should preclude granting LWOP; and
• whether or not the member is undergoing a period of obligatory service.

8.1.07 Reduction of Annual Leave​

A member’s annual leave entitlement is reduced as a result of any complete month of LWOP.
A period of LWOP is deemed to be continuous service but shall not be included in the computation of continuous service for the purpose of annual leave entitlement. The exception is for periods of LWOP for maternity and parental purposes which count as continuous service.

8.1.08 Recall to Duty​

A member on LWOP is subject to recall to duty at any time. The recall to duty of a member on LWOP shall be done personally by the CO and shall be for a minimum of five working days.
Periods of LWOP shall not be broken for the purpose of establishing an annual leave credit.

8.1.09 Impact on Obligatory Service​

Pursuant to DAOD 5049-1, Obligatory Service, any period of obligatory service shall be extended by a period equal to the LWOP that has been granted during a period of obligatory service.

Short answer : You totally can take LWOP for non-parental, personal reasons

Long answer: What's your justification?

 

[PMedMoe]

If your health reasons are recognized, you could see an MO about sick leave.

I don't think LWOP was designed for members to just "take a break".

 

[dapaterson]

If your health reasons are recognized, you could see an MO about sick leave.

I don't think LWOP was designed for members to just "take a break".

It mirrors language in some PS collective agreements, where it is indeed there 'just to let someone take a break". The CAF in its infinite wisdom, however, seems to think "happy and relaxed personnel aren't worth the effort" and so throws up constant roadblocks to people like the OP who want to take a break.

There may well be valid reasons why certain dates would not be supportable, but a blanket "no" speaks to poor quality leadership.

 

[captloadie]

It mirrors language in some PS collective agreements, where it is indeed there 'just to let someone take a break". The CAF in its infinite wisdom, however, seems to think "happy and relaxed personnel aren't worth the effort" and so throws up constant roadblocks to people like the OP who want to take a break.

There may well be valid reasons why certain dates would not be supportable, but a blanket "no" speaks to poor quality leadership.

Specifically when we have granted this type of leave to allow members to follow non-military personal pursuits, like climbing Everest.

However, I agree that if there is a medical nexus, approved sick leave from a MO is a better route to take.

 

[PMedMoe]

It mirrors language in some PS collective agreements, where it is indeed there 'just to let someone take a break". The CAF in its infinite wisdom, however, seems to think "happy and relaxed personnel aren't worth the effort" and so throws up constant roadblocks to people like the OP who want to take a break.

There may well be valid reasons why certain dates would not be supportable, but a blanket "no" speaks to poor quality leadership.

Oh, I know. And I agree.

 

[dapaterson]

I know a high performer who requested one year LWOP for a round the world trip with their family (partner's work transition and kids age was perfect). Refused by DGMC because "it would be too hard to manage the succession plan".

That's right, "Giving you leave would force a career manager to do their job, so we refused it."

The option they were given was to release, then re-enrol and perhaps be brought back one or two ranks lower.

The did not go on LWOP. They did not stay past their 25. Perhaps there's a connection...

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I know a high performer who requested one year LWOP for a round the world trip with their family (partner's work transition and kids age was perfect). Refused by DGMC because "it would be too hard to manage the succession plan".

That's right, "Giving you leave would force a career manager to do their job, so we refused it."

The option they were given was to release, then re-enrol and perhaps be brought back one or two ranks lower.

The did not go on LWOP. They did not stay past their 25. Perhaps there's a connection...

We deserve to lose those people if this is what passes for HR in the CAF....

 

[Furniture]

We deserve to lose those people if this is what passes for HR in the CAF....

You've been in long enough to know the CAF does not have HR... At best it has policies it applies unevenly based on a combination of the moon phase, which zodiac sign is ascending, and how the CO feels at any given time.

 

[dapaterson]

You've been in long enough to know the CAF does not have HR... At best it has policies it applies unevenly based on a combination of the moon phase, which zodiac sign is ascending, and how the CO feels at any given time.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Bring your memo with your denied LWOP request to a doctor and articulate why it's important you go on sick leave.

The NCR is full of CAF members, many of whom are high-ranking, who are getting paid big bucks to attend appointments only.
Sometimes for years.

 

[Quirky]

The NCR is full of CAF members, many of whom are high-ranking, who are getting paid big bucks to attend appointments only.
Sometimes for years.

I think I know where we could save a $Billion….cut the CAF Welfare.

OP, get that chit from the MO if your CoC wont play ball.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

I know a high performer who requested one year LWOP for a round the world trip with their family (partner's work transition and kids age was perfect). Refused by DGMC because "it would be too hard to manage the succession plan".

That's right, "Giving you leave would force a career manager to do their job, so we refused it."

The option they were given was to release, then re-enrol and perhaps be brought back one or two ranks lower.

The did not go on LWOP. They did not stay past their 25. Perhaps there's a connection...

We had a very smart Captain in the Regt who asked to go on leave without pay to attend LSE. Denied. He is now a bright (if not acerbic) academic in the US.....

 

[OldSolduer]

It mirrors language in some PS collective agreements, where it is indeed there 'just to let someone take a break". The CAF in its infinite wisdom, however, seems to think "happy and relaxed personnel aren't worth the effort" and so throws up constant roadblocks to people like the OP who want to take a break.

There may well be valid reasons why certain dates would not be supportable, but a blanket "no" speaks to poor quality leadership.

Not to mention that any CO can decide the policy doesn't apply to any of those under his/her command. Or basically "doing what they feel like" with no thought to what policy actually says.

 

[Dhillongs]

Ya LWOP in the Reg F is very very tough without good reason, the only other option is sick leave if that's a route. I know it's not ideal because the reason maybe different but unfortunately it just doesn't work that way. Unless you're in the Air Force? , but you should really look at the reason and no harm in going into a CDU and stating where you are at and what a little bit of time off can give you. Gotta look after yourself.