Ordered "to get a phone" / Contact Information [Merged]

[mariomike]

Haggis,

Could you point to the ref that specifies 4%? I seem to recall doing some digging quite a while back and it had it listed as 0.5%.

I saw this.

Military Factor

It is important to note that the TC analyses, as applied to the CAF, also provide latitude to determine the dollar value of the unique aspects of CAF service. The most obvious example is the Military Factor, which values the major characteristics of military service. Although the unique aspects of military service such as Code of Service Discipline, separation from family and posting turbulence are not easily quantified, the Military Factor was originally valued at 4% of salary for all non-commissioned members and general service officers. As of April 1, 1999, the Military Factor stands at 7.5% for non-commissioned members and for general service officers. These recent increases were in recognition of a higher operational tempo and resulting increases in the incidence of separation, and a new component (Personal Limitations and Liabilities), which further recognizes the implications inherent in the military system of unlimited liability. Another less obvious example is the fact that CAF members are not eligible for overtime. To adjust for this in the TC analyses, values of 6% of salary for non-commissioned members and 4% of salary for general service officers are used.

Comparability, therefore, is not a case of making one rate of pay equal to another. Instead, a comparability shortfall is the amount of increase to CAF pay that is needed to equalize the bottom line (dollars per hour worked) between the CAF and the PS values, but only after considering all salary and applicable benefits including unique CAF conditions of service.
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/caf-community-pay/index.page

 

[Haggis]

Haggis,

Could you point to the ref that specifies 4%? I seem to recall doing some digging quite a while back and it had it listed as 0.5%.

Marionmike beat me to it.  It's actually 7.5% which is intended to cover, among other things, haircuts, uniform maintenance and
attendance at mess functions.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Easy peasy....you'll be ordered to move into the shacks if you don't want to get a phone for your convenience of being contacted.

Seen it done, along with administrative measures. Mind you this mouthbreather was on his way out and the CoC had enough of his bullshit.

As most have grown up with a telephone, and later answering machines, in Canada we had no problems with letting personnel move out of the shacks and maintaining contact numbers at their units.  Where it was not common to have a phone (Europe prior to the late '80s.), Bdes would have personnel delegated as "Alert Recall" who would then have a list of personnel, their addresses and then have to physically go knocking on doors to "Alert" them of any "Recall".  They would check off whether or not a person was "Alerted"; whether they were at their residence or not.  Personnel who did not arrive at their unit in a reasonable time, or not at all, where noted and sometimes Charged. 
If a belligerent member today insists on not maintaining a contact number where they would be notified within a reasonable period of time, then some form of Duty Personnel would be required to fill the task of physically going to the member's place of residence and "Alerting them of a Recall".  Text messaging and email are not necessarily the most economical and efficient way to conduct "Alert Recalls".  If a person can not be contacted at their contact number, and they do not report to their place of duty within a reasonable time, then charges of AWOL may be laid against them.
This is, after all, the military; not some civilian job. 

Yada,  freakin yada,............all I asked was this.

I'm with Max...............I'd like to see that in writing somewhere.
YOU need me then YOU supply the way to do that......................

Buellar?

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Does is say in writing I have to be at work at 07:30?

 

[Haggis]

Does is say in writing I have to be at work at 07:30?

Quite likely, somewhere in base or unit Standing Orders, it does.

 

[George Wallace]

Yada,  freakin yada,............all I asked was this.

Buellar?

You know darn well that you are just being obstinate.  Routine Orders, Standing Orders, the necessity to maintain ORBATS and Contact Lists, etc. all cover this. 

But if you really would like it in written form, and remember that legalese is usually written in a general form to cover eventualities, you can look at the NDA for what constitutes AWOL.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I am being obstinate...............but so far :crickets:

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

George,...your ninja edit about awol cleared everything right up for me..................WHAT?????

What pisses you off so much about wanting to see a regulation anyways??

 

[George Wallace]

I am being obstinate...............but so far :crickets:

Yes you are.  Another little Article from the NDA; Article 88 - Desertion

Desertion

Marginal note: Offence

88. (1) Every person who deserts or attempts to desert is guilty of an offence and on conviction, if the person committed the offence on active service or under orders for active service, is liable to imprisonment for life or to less punishment and, in any other case, is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to less punishment.
Marginal noteefinition

(2) A person deserts who
(a) being on or having been warned for active service, duty during an emergency or other important service, is absent without authority with the intention of avoiding that service;
(b) having been warned that his vessel is under sailing orders, is absent without authority with the intention of missing that vessel;
(c) absents himself without authority from his place of duty with the intention of remaining absent from his place of duty;
(d) is absent without authority from his place of duty and at any time during such absence forms the intention of remaining absent from his place of duty; or
(e) while absent with authority from his place of duty, with the intention of remaining absent from his place of duty, does any act or omits to do anything the natural and probable consequence of which act or omission is to preclude the person from being at his place of duty at the time required.
Marginal noteresumption of desertion

(3) A person who has been absent without authority for a continuous period of six months or more shall, unless the contrary is proved, be presumed to have had the intention of remaining absent from his place of duty.
R.S., c. N-4, s. 78.

There you have it in writing. 

Happy?

 

[George Wallace]

George,...your ninja edit about awol cleared everything right up for me..................WHAT?????

What pisses you off so much about wanting to see a regulation anyways??

As they say; ignorance of the Law is no excuse.  You have TI to know that there are regulations to cover this, even if you haven't seen the regulation in print (Black and White).  In most cases Article 88 - Desertion under the NDA would not be laid against a person as being rather extreme, but rather a charge of AWOL.  The case in question is covered under Article 88 in that the person has done an act or omited to do anything the natural and probable consequence of which act or omission is to preclude the person from being at his place of duty at the time required.  It is right there in "Black and White".

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I'm always happy.
Still haven't seen a thing that answers what I asked to be presented, but damn, I'm happy.

EDIT: Yes I have TI but get used to the fact that the kids today are not as stupid as you and I were...........they will ask and, as far as I'm concerned, 'authority' has a duty to present 'black and white'. [to use your words]

 

[reccecrewman]

Does that mean phone bills can be tax deductible as an Employment Expense?  :christmas happy:

That's a negative.  Just as boot polish, brasso, haircut fee's and razor blades are not tax deductible.  Despite the fact that you are expected to show up for work with a regulation haircut, (which generally requires more monthly visits to a barber than your average civvie incurs) clean shaven, (which also may require you buying more blades than your average civvie in a month since skipping a shave isn't an option) with a shiny cap badge, (in some cases) and black boots, (in my day anyway, I've seen a lot of the troops in the new issue boots and cannot speak informed on their maintenance and care) the Military is not in any way mandated to keep you in personal sundries.

I believe it  is every soldiers responsibility to maintain a serviceable, reliable means of comms that their C-o-C can count on to reach you for whatever reason they deem appropriate.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I believe it  is every soldiers responsibility to maintain a serviceable, reliable means of comms that their C-o-C can count on to reach you for whatever reason they deem appropriate.

..and I agree with you.  Max asked, and I seconded, the question of 'show me'.

It seems to have some tied up in knots...........

 

[McG]

Bruce, it is the CAF, not a unionized PS job.  Not every lawful command is published and searchable on the Internet.  The CO of a unit with a readiness requirement can tell his guys that they will maintain a means of contact.  If someone wants to play smart and tell the CO that the unit needs to provide the means of contact if the unit wants to contact him after hours, then the CO has the ability to provide those means in the form of a room in the shacks where the member is obligated to reside.  You can google that obligation to reside in quarters under QR&O 28.01(2), but the delegating of authority to COs is in CFAO and not something that can be found on the web.

 

[George Wallace]

..and I agree with you.  Max asked, and I seconded, the question of 'show me'.

It seems to have some tied up in knots...........

:

I showed you and you refused to believe it.  Not much one can do if someone does not accept what is written in the NDA.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I am not sure that it says anywhere that one has to have a phone while in the CF.  However, this is not 7-11 or Walmart- you do not just punch out at the end of your 8 hour shift and go home. You are liable for service at odd hours and unexpectedly. Therefore, the real onus is that you either have to be contactable or you must regularly check in with your unit (how regularily would depend entirely on the nature of your unit). If you are on a Ship and are Ready Duty Ship, you have a certain amount of time to report for duty.  It is not unreasonable for a CO to generally know the whereabouts of his personnel at all times.

If you are on some form of unit official duty, then yes, it would not be unreasonable to be issued a phone or BB.

 

[George Wallace]

National Defence Act

Article 88, Para 2, Sub Para e.

"A person deserts who: 

while absent with authority from his place of duty (ie. on Leave or outside duty hours), with the intention of remaining absent from his place of duty (In this case not provide reasonable contact information in which to be contacted for recall in a reasonable period of time.), does any act or omits to do anything (ie. give a contact. 'phone' number) the natural and probable consequence of which act or omission is to preclude the person from being at his place of duty at time required (ie. Alert Recall)."

A chargable offence under the NDA. 

What more do you need?


Again, I am sure that this drastic a Charge would not be laid, but rather the lesser charge of AWOL or perhaps that of not obeying a lawful command.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

means of contact. 

Many of different ways that can happen..........I believe the OP had a discussion where an individual was threatened with a charge because he didn't answer his cell phone [ for a trivial reason] and many agreed with it.  So, we've gone from land lines, expected to answer if you're home, to cell phones, expected to answer 24/7 [heavens forbid you go swimming].  And if the next technology puts recallable chips into someone's arms we just say "Hey, that's how it is?"

Bear in mind I'm not discussing 'ready requirements' here' and smartasses will always get there's...................I'm talking Joe Average who actually wishes a bit of a life when he's not out in the field?  Seriously, "Bloggins, we're ordering you to have a home phone and a cell phone?"

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

George,....stop highlighting 'reasonable"............that's not your forte.

 

[TCM621]

It really boils down to two factors:

What is your recall requirement and what is a reasonable definition of "able to get a hold of".

If you are on 24 hour stand by, recallable at anytime on short notice then the Cf should provide you with a duty phone or paper.

If you are on 24 hours notice to move you should have some way to be notified in which you could reply with the day.  This could be an online voice mail, land line with answering machine, cell phone etc.

Otherwise, as long you are capable of checking in every 3 days, You should be good. (my understanding is the entire CAF is basically on 72 hour notice) if you work 8 to 4 Monday to Friday, you should be good.

That said, anyone who doesn't have a phone, cell or land line, has issues. Either he is a Luddite who pines for the days of the pony express, or he has serious financial issues which should probably be explored. Or he is an asshat .