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

Benefits Cut...

PPCLI Guy said:
Just saying that you are, as you surmised, most likely wrong.  I have two purebred German Shepherds, a male and a female.  They are both from strong bloodlines, and are extraordinary specimens of the breed. Both are neutered. I, and most military dog owners I know, have no interest in breeding or showing them.  I enjoy their company, and their size and training provide both my wife and I some modicum of comfort during my frequent absences.  The opportunities were definitely there - my male in particular has generated many queries about breeding from him.  Again, I was never interested in the "business of making and selling more dogs".  I just enjoy the company of large and competent dogs.

I have to be honesty, the tone of your post is more than just a tad confrontational.  You made some very large assumptions and worked yourself into a fever-pitch.  Nowhere does the OP state that he is running a business.  Rather, he is concerned that the rules have changed mid APS, which is something that I understand.

It may be time to take this one down a notch - it appears to be getting quite personal.

Just saying.

Nope, not worked up. No fever pitch. That's why the caveat at the front. If it is in fact just a big dog, I'll withdraw from the conversation.

If it is in fact a breeder, I'll stand by my comments. It's the way I read it. Internet stuff and all.

You can be as honesty as you want. You call it confrontational, that's just your opinion.

I don't consider it such. It's not personal either.

It's not the taxpayers job to move anyone's business, if that's what it is. That's all, plain and simple.

Glad you enjoy the company of your big dogs.

Just sayin'
 
MJP said:
Yea you are right...All those open trades right now shows how hard of a sell it is.

I get the sarcasm, but like I said in my post, when the intake goes back up again, like it has been for years up until late 2010, we will have another problem. I don`t like comparing our benefits package to that of the private sector just like I don`t like comparing what we do for a living to that of the private sector. We want to attract the best of the best.
 
4Feathers said:
I get the sarcasm, but like I said in my post, when the intake goes back up again, like it has been for years up until late 2010, we will have another problem. I don`t like comparing our benefits package to that of the private sector just like I don`t like comparing what we do for a living to that of the private sector. We want to attract the best of the best.

We saw an increase in recruiting because we got an increase in overall numbers.  But I do agree that numbers are cyclical.  I really don't think that our total compensation package except for some specialists will be a barrier to reaching our recruiting numbers in the future.  Our total compensation package is, despite the recent and maybe soon to be cuts, is one of the better ones.  Anyone arguing they are not paid well for what they do, is deluding themselves.

There are outliers, but I know of very few industries where a 20ish year old person can make close to $4-50,000 with only grade 12. 
 
Starting with 20 days paid leave a year (not including weekends), a healthy pension, and a robust system of self-development and advancement.
 
We need to be very careful about generalizing too much when talking about the overall strength of recruiting and retention.

Only a few positions in the forces are filled by a 20 year old with a grade 12 education. We quickly turn them into 23/30/35 year olds with a valuable 3/10/15 years of work experience and training. It's a complex situation.

There is an enormous gap between "intake for infantry is full" and "we have no issues to address with recruiting and retention".





 
The latest

http://cmp-cpm.forces.mil.ca/dgcb/dcba/docs/cffaqa_e.doc

ISSUE : CF Compensation and Benefits Framework

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) related to changes announced in CANFORGEN 145/12, effective 1 September 2012

Q1. In the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program (CFIRP) Directive, how are the Core, Customized and Personalized monetary envelopes described and how do they fit together?
A1.
 Core benefits are those considered to be essential to relocation and are funded directly by the Department, such as move of Household Goods and Effects (HG&E), transportation, meal reimbursement while transiting, commercial lodging expenses.  Members are not required to use these benefits; however, unused benefits cannot be exchanged or assigned a monetary value to pay for other benefits or expenses. CF members who do not use core benefits shall forfeit them, i.e. the money goes back to the Government coffers.

 Custom benefits are enhancements to relocation and the funding is calculated based on three factors: accommodation, transportation and shipment of HG&E.  Custom funding is based on the factors of type of accommodation, distance traveled and family size. The custom funding formula is used by CF members to pay for custom benefits (e.g. shipment of a recreational vehicle, expenses beyond one month for reverse Temporary Dual Residency Allowance). CF members who do not use custom benefits shall forfeit them, i.e. the money goes back to the Government coffers. On the other hand, once the customized funds have been used remaining expenditures are from the personalized funds.

 Personalized benefits are those deemed non-essential but attributable to relocation, with funding based on a formula composed of a variety of elements (if eligible): movement grant, posting allowance (or Reserve Relocation Allowance), Long Term Storage (LTS) Incentives and House Hunting Trip (HHT) Savings.  Relocation expenses may be reimbursed from the personalized funds when the expenditure is attributable to the relocation and meets the intent of the CFIRP. These must be reasonable, justifiable, and supported by receipts. The reimbursement of these expenses must not constitute personal gain.  It is within CF members’ discretion to use personalized benefits. The personalized funding formula is subject to Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) regulations and available for use in three ways:

o it can pay for any personalized benefits, thereby reducing the tax deducted at source for some eligible benefits as per CRA guidelines;
o it can pay for additional custom benefits beyond what can be covered by the custom funding formula; and
o remaining funds can be cashed out and paid directly to CF members.

Q2. In the CFIRP directive, how is the Personalized budgetary envelope calculated for a CF member?
A2.
a. Reg F members: if the Reg F member is moving without dependant(s), mbr will get half a month’s salary for a posting allowance (a full month’s salary if moving with dependants), $650 for the movement grant.  In addition, a CF member may also be eligible for the following incentives:  Real Estate Incentive (REI) (up to $12,000), Long Term Storage (LTS) Incentive, and the House Hunting Trip Savings (HHT) Incentives.

b. Res F members: receive a Reserve relocation allowance ($1000) when authorized to relocate their (D)HG&E,  and $650 for the movement grant.  In addition, a CF member may also be eligible for the following incentives:  Real Estate Incentive (REI) (up to $12,000), Long Term Storage (LTS) Incentive, and the House Hunting Trip Savings (HHT) Incentives.
Q3.  When do the changes announced in CANFORGEN 145/12 take effect? 
A3.  The effective date is 1 Sep 2012. 

• SEPARATION EXPENSE BENEFITS: changes are effective 1 Sep 2012

• TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE FOR RESERVE FORCE: changes are effective 1 Sep 2012

• RELOCATIONS (CFIRP & CBI 208 Section 8 relocations) changes are administered as follows:

Member’s situation… Policy* in effect prior to 1 Sep 12 Policy* in effect 1 Sep 12 and after
Posting msg or transfer msg DTG of 31 Aug 12 or before (regardless of COS/RFD date)
X
Posting msg or transfer msg DTG of 1 Sep 12 and after
(regardless of COS/RFD date)
X
Imposed Restriction - Reg F members on approved IR under a post instr of DTG of 31 Aug 12 or before, who now decide to relocate their (D)HG&E
X
Imposed Restriction - Res F members on Class "C" reserve service on approved IR status (under a posting instr of DTG of 31 Aug 12 or before) AND who have at least 12 months remaining to serve in the period of employment (POE) and/or POE extension and now decide to relocate their (D)HG&E

Note: if mbr serving on class "C" reserve service has less than 12 months remaining to serve on their POE and/or POE extension, there is no authority to relocate (D)HG&E however, provided members continue to meet the IR requirements determined by DGMC, mbrs would be eligible to receive SE benefits until the end of POE and/or extension.
X
Imposed Restriction - Res F members on Class "B" reserve service on approved IR status (under a posting instruction with a DTG of 31 Aug 2012 or before) AND who have at least 12 months remaining to serve in the POE and/or POE extension and now decide to relocate their (D)HG&E.  Separation expense (SE) benefit ceases 1 Sep 12.  As such, the restriction is lifted and relocation must occur within 6 months of 1 Sep 12.  Failure to meet this deadline, for other than service reasons, will result in the forfeiture of relocation benefits.

Note: if a mbr serving on class "B" reserve service has less than 12 months remaining to serve on their POE and/or POE extension, there is no authority to relocate (D)HG&E at Public expense. And, effective 1 Sep 12, there is no authority to receive separation expense (SE) benefit.
X
Intended Place of Residence (IPR) – mbrs who are eligible to and elect their IPR or early IPR prior to 1 Sep 2012 (CFAO 15-2 Annex C Appendix 2 para 2 a.)
X
Intended Place of Residence (IPR) – mbrs who are eligible to and elect their IPR or early IPR on or after 1 Sep 2012 (CFAO 15-2 Annex C Appendix 2 para 2 a.)
X
* Policy = CFIRP directive and CBI 208 Section 8 relocations (with the exception of CBI 208.997 in which the changes are effective 1 Sep 12 for all CF mbrs)

Q4.  Mortgage Breaking Penalties, Mortgage Early Repayment Penalties Benefit – will members be grandfathered? 
A4.  No.  However, as these expenses are no longer reimbursed by the employer (CF), these expenses may be claimable under Personal Income Tax.

Q5.  If I was previously on Imposed Restriction (IR) and receiving Separation Expense benefits, can I now opt for Special Commuting Assistance (SCA)?
A5.  No.  Members on IR cannot opt for special commuting Assistance (SCA) and members on SCA cannot opt for SE benefits once they have started to receive SCA. The choice of SCA or SE benefit must be made prior to the commencement of reimbursement the benefit
Q6.  If I was previously on Imposed Restriction (IR) in a location where rations were available and provided at no cost to members prior to 1 Sep 12, will I be grandfathered?
A6. No.  Effective 1 Sep 12, members will be responsible to cover the cost of their own meals.

Q7.  Will CF members see a future pay adjustment to compensate for the loss of benefits?
A7.  No. Pay adjustments are not intended to compensate for the loss of benefits. Benefits are being realigned between the various relocation funding envelopes, offering our members the opportunity to better weigh the variety of options that are available to them and make the best choices when managing their own moves or their particular situation.  In most cases, the changes reflect minor adjustments to very robust and generous overall compensation frameworks and reimbursement programs.

Q8.  Will members moving summer 2012 be affected by these changes?
A8.  Yes. Separation expense and reserve transportation allowance will change on 1 Sep 12.  For relocations under CFIRP and CBI 208 Section 8, your posting instruction/transfer message or IPR election date will determine if you are or are not affected by these changes. A DTG or IPR election date prior to 1 Sep 2012 will be administered under the policy in effect prior to 1 Sep 12. (Q3 provides detailed answer).

Q9.  If my relocation costs would be such that they exceeded my “Personalized envelope”, would I have to pay for the rest out of pocket?
A9.  As a CF member, you decide what benefits you want covered under your “Personalized envelope”.  As part of your decision making process, you should research CRA guidelines for claimable benefits as additional expenses not reimbursed by the CF may be claimed as a moving expense on the CF member’s tax return.

Q10.  Why are CF members losing their benefits?
A10.  For CF relocations, while the majority of core benefits will remain, some of the benefits that were covered through the Customized envelope will now be covered by the Personalised envelope.  For those benefits that will cease to be supported such as: Mortgage Breaking Penalties/Early repayment penalties and Mortgage Loan Insurance, Separation Expense applicability to members on Class “B” reserve service, Separation Expense Meals and rations and incidentals benefit, Transportation assistance for members on Class “B” reserve service, this realignment is to ensure core military requirements are covered.

Q11. Why are the CF Relocation benefits different than those of other government departments (OGD)?
A11.  The benefits package is in line with unique requirements of the Canadian Forces and this is why there are some differences with what other government organisations may receive.  Since relocations are closely related to operational requirements and career progression, CF members may be called upon to move more frequently than employees of other government organisations and as such, benefit packages are tailored accordingly.

Q12. Will the changes related to the separation expense benefits affect members posted outside Canada?
A12.  No.  CBI 208.997 (formerly 209.997) is not applicable to members posted outside Canada.  In their case, they are entitled to benefits under CBI 10 (Military Foreign Service Instructions). (MFSI 10.2.13).

Q13. I am a member who is serving on a class “B” reserve period of employment, with an approved relocation of (D)HG&E. I was authorized IR status and received SE benefits until 31 Aug 2012. What are my options for 1 Sep 12 and on?
A13.  As of 1 Sep 12, members serving on Class “B” reserve service authorized a relocation at Public expense are no longer eligible to separation expense (SE) benefits. The time remaining to serve in the POE and/or POE extension is key:

a. if you have more than one year remaining to serve on the POE and/or POE extension, you have six months from 1 Sep 12 to relocate your (D)HG&E at Public expense; or

b. if you have less than one year remaining to serve on the POE and/or POE extension, there is no authority to relocate your (D)HG&E at Public expense.
You are encouraged to familiarize yourself with CFIRP article 13.09 Return move and CFIRP article 13.10 Early termination of employment to make informed decisions.

Q14. I am posted prohibited to Borden for military occupation/trades training. Will I receive rations and quarters at public expense?
A14. No. Provided you qualify for SE under CBI 208.997(3), your entitlement will be for quarters at public expense but you will no longer receive rations at public expense nor low rate incidentals starting 1 Sep 12.

Q15. I have received my posting message.  I have requested and been approved for IR status, what are my entitlements at my new place of duty?
A15. Effective 1 Sep 12, Reg F and Res F on class “C” proceeding on authorized IR and in receipt of separation expense (SE) who:

a. are occupying commercial, non-commercial accommodation or family housing may be reimbursed up to the maximum monthly accommodation rate, inclusive of furniture rental (where applicable) detailed at CBI 208.997 Annex A, actual and reasonable monthly parking charges to a maximum of $100.00/month  and actual and reasonable basic internet, basic cable and cellular or land-line connection expenses (where applicable);
b. those occupying private accommodation, where rations and quarters (R&Q) are unavailable, are eligible to be reimbursed an amount not to exceed the monthly charge under paragraph (1) of QR&O 208.50 for single quarter type H1 (very good), actual and reasonable parking charges not to exceed $100.00/month, actual and reasonable basic internet, basic cable and cellular or land-line telephone connection fees; or 
c. where R&Q are available, the entitlement will be quarters at public expense, parking charges prescribed in  paragraph (1) of QR&O 208.50(if applicable), and actual and reasonable basic internet, basic cable and cellular or land-line telephone connection expenses.  The provision for reimbursement of  65% of the daily dinner rate, rations at public expense and/or incidental expense will no longer be part of the core SE benefits package as of 1 Sep 12.


Q16. I am part of a service couple and posted away from my current place of duty at which my service spouse will remain.  As we could not be co-located for service reasons, what are my entitlements as I am separated from my (D) HG&E?
A16. Effective 1 Sep 12, service couples who qualify for SE IAW CBI 208.997  may be reimbursed the applicable rates, depending on the temporary accommodation, identified at Q15above.  The previous provision to for 65% of the daily dinner rate, rations at public expense and/or incidentals will no longer be part of the core SE benefits package as of 1 Sep 12.

Q17. I am a member serving on a Class “B” reserve service and have accepted a 3 year period of employment (POE) with relocation authorized.  My family will not be relocating with me; will I receive separation expense benefits under CBI 208.997?
A17. No. Effective 1 Sep 12, benefits under CBI 208.997 are not payable to members accepting a period of employment of on Class “B” reserve service, when the relocation is authorized. 

Q18. I am a member serving on a Class “B” reserve service and I have accepted a 3 year period of employment (POE) and I was not authorized relocation at Public expense.  Will I receive Reserve Transportation Assistance under CBI 209.045?
A18. No. Effective 1 Sep 12, only members serving on a Class “A” reserve service are eligible to receive of Reserve Transportation Assistance.  The benefit will no longer be payable to members on Class “B” reserve service
 
Proud Canadian said:
Q14. I am posted prohibited to Borden for military occupation/trades training. Will I receive rations and quarters at public expense?
A14. No. Provided you qualify for SE under CBI 208.997(3), your entitlement will be for quarters at public expense but you will no longer receive rations at public expense nor low rate incidentals starting 1 Sep 12.

So as expected, members on prohibited posting are fucked. The only option is to post families whole hog. That's going to save the CF money  ???

And just to ensure I am reading that right, Those who qualify for SE get quarters and nothing else? A thousand dollar hit a month. That is going to hurt, a lot.
 
Proud Canadian said:
The latest
...
Q11. Why are the CF Relocation benefits different than those of other government departments (OGD)?
A11.  The benefits package is in line with unique requirements of the Canadian Forces and this is why there are some differences with what other government organisations may receive.  Since relocations are closely related to operational requirements and career progression, CF members may be called upon to move more frequently than employees of other government organisations and as such, benefit packages are tailored accordingly.

Q16. I am part of a service couple and posted away from my current place of duty at which my service spouse will remain.  As we could not be co-located for service reasons, what are my entitlements as I am separated from my (D) HG&E?
A16. Effective 1 Sep 12, service couples who qualify for SE IAW CBI 208.997  may be reimbursed the applicable rates, depending on the temporary accommodation, identified at Q15above.  The previous provision to for 65% of the daily dinner rate, rations at public expense and/or incidentals will no longer be part of the core SE benefits package as of 1 Sep 12.

Q19 (caused by answer to Q16 - A16):  Can you explain why it is then that their benefits are higher because this answer makes it seem as if we "are called upon more frequently than employees of other government organisations and, as such benefit packages are tailored accordingly." For example, weekend travel assistance to see their families when separted vs our 'once per year' assistance when separated or 2200.00 bucks per month rent in a location by another federal department vs our 1600.00 in same location?? Hopefully, this isn't because they negotiate these things and can strike when we can not; after all, you took away our severance pay based upon their union negotiations - why not the same rates and entitlements for us?

Q20 (caused by answer to Q11 - A11): :

This is where I fall in (4th posting as such). Is there a movement now afoot to ensure that same trade/same rank pers such as myself are now forcefully moved (as some have been sitting in their current postings for 16+ years!!)?? I can't get to where my old man is posted because "there are no empty positions for me", yet persons of same same trade/rank as me were sitting in that same base/location for 15+ years!!

This old boys network needs to cease, officially, now that my family will be paying out of our pocket when we have no choice - especially given that we are one of those married service couples who actually do our jobs and meet our contract obligations by going "where ever, whenever for whatever" that the CF requires of us.

MWO X in location Y refuses that spot you just had to put me in? Post him/her anyway and deny the IR request that he/she is going to submit.

I have serious issues with MSC now paying out of pocket (and those who are prohibited posted by force) when others same trade/rank have been, are allowed to, and - no doubt - will continue to be allowed to grow roots in certain locations. Now that mantra effects me and my family financially (it's always affected my family morale and QOL) as well.
_____________________

I foresee a grievance within my ~30 day future; I can't be the only one posted separately while others same trade/rank get coddled and grow roots.

So, I see that nothing here actually fixes or corrects the problems with gravy train riders or with the propensity for previous IR approvals for person who never did have intent to, and never will move their families to their new location of posting. It also doesn't address other items such as troops in the field paying to eat etc (they are not deployed overseas) just as the rest of us (MSCs and new entrants on courses etc - prohibited moves) who are "forcefully separated" from our families at the CF's behest are.

Are they still working on it, or is this the end result of "it's still being sorted out and worked on?"
 
The IR claims section at the CFSU(O) orderly room was an interesting place this morning.............
 
ArmyVern said:
Q19 (caused by answer to Q11 - A11):  Can you explain why it is then that their benefits are higher because this answer makes it seem as if we "are called upon more frequently than employees of other government organisations and, as such benefit packages are tailored accordingly." For example, weekend travel assistance to see their families when separted vs our 'once per year' assistance when separated or 2200.00 bucks per month rent in a location by another federal department vs our 1600.00 in same location?? Hopefully, this isn't because they negotiate these things and can strike when we can not; after all, you took away our severance pay based upon their union negotiations - why not the same rates and entitlements for us?
I foresee a grievance within my ~30 day future; I can't be the only one posted separately while others same trade/rank get coddled and grow roots.

So, I see that nothing here actually fixes or corrects the problems with gravy train riders or with the propensity for previous IR approvals for person who never did have intent to, and never will move their families to their new location of posting. It also doesn't address other items such as troops in the field paying to eat etc (they are not deployed overseas) just as the rest of us (MSCs and new entrants on courses etc - prohibited moves) who are "forcefully separated" from our families at the CF's behest are.

Are they still working on it, or is this the end result of "it's still being sorted out and worked on?"

I may have to grieve as well. We'll see how my memo comes up. I have already been told by my immediate supervisor he won't support it but it may be approved in the end.
 
CDN Aviator said:
The IR claims section at the CFSU(O) orderly room was an interesting place this morning.............

Come on...
main.php
 
CDN Aviator said:
The IR claims section at the CFSU(O) orderly room was an interesting place this morning.............

I bet you're glad your you're cleared.

I pity the clerks as they will be at the coalface bearing the wrath of those who are not in these circumstances by choice. I still think they need to come up with something such as a "Guarantee of IR/Intent to move DF&E" to weed out legit IRs from those with not an iota of intent to ever move their family to whatever location:

"You have recently applied for an Imposed Restriction (IR) posting status to be posted separately from your DF&E as your dependent child is entering Grade 12 and is graduating in June 2013. We agree that, in the circumstances, moving your child with you this APS would adversely effect his ability to program-choose last year course to be used for entry into a post secondary education facility. We are approving your application for this choice of status, with an expirey date of 30 Aug 2013. As high schools hold graduation ceremonies in June of each year, you must contact careers immediately upon your child's graduation so that message can be cut lifting your restriction. You will then be required to relocate your family no later than 30 Aug 2013. Failure to  relocate your DF&E to your location by that date will result in a ceasing of your benefits effective 01 Sep 2013. It is not the taxpayers responsibilty to pay for your family to maintain 2 seperate residences when you have chosen to live in this manner.

Please sign below as having read and understood in front of the witnessing officer and return to this career shop so that we can proceed with cutting your message authorizing your IR. A failure to sign and return this document will be interpreted as advising that IR status is no longer requested/required by you and your family.

Thanks, and have a great day.
"

 
Tony Manifold said:
I may have to grieve as well. We'll see how my memo comes up. I have already been told by my immediate supervisor he won't support it but it may be approved in the end.

Me to immediate supervisor: "You're not going to support it?  Well, it's a good thing you're not the IA, then...because nobody's asking your opinion".

If it may be approved in the end, but he won't support it, clearly there's something wrong with his thought process.  Just sayin'.
 
ArmyVern said:
You have recently applied for an Imposed Restriction (IR) posting status to be posted separately from your DF&E as your dependent child is entering Grade 12 and is graduating in June 2013. We agree that, in the circumstances, moving your child with you this APS would adversely effect his ability to program-choose last year course to be used for entry into a post secondary education facility. We are approving your application for this choice of status, with an expirey date of 30 Aug 2013. As high schools hold graduation ceremonies in June of each year, you must contact careers immediately upon your child's graduation so that message can be cut lifting your restriction. You will then be required to relocate your family no later than 30 Aug 2013. Failure to  relocate your DF&E to your location by that date will result in a ceasing of your benefits effective 01 Sep 2013.

Heck, I'd even sign that as the "Dependent" 

Question, so if the incidentals and meals and such are being taken away, how much is the SE portion then?? 
 
newwifey said:
Question, so if the incidentals and meals and such are being taken away, how much is the SE portion then?? 
The answer has been posts in this thread.  You need to read the CBI as SE varies depending on the type of accommodation that one has.  In all cases, the rent is part of SE.
 
MCG said:
The answer has been posts in this thread.  You need to read the CBI as SE varies depending on the type of accommodation that one has.  In all cases, the rent is part of SE.

Thanks!  I misunderstood that then.  I thought there might have been another component besides rent.

Yikes, this is gonna be a tight year to look forward to.  :o
 
Occam said:
Me to immediate supervisor: "You're not going to support it?  Well, it's a good thing you're not the IA, then...because nobody's asking your opinion".

If it may be approved in the end, but he won't support it, clearly there's something wrong with his thought process.  Just sayin'.

That is sort of how it went. Even if they won't support it, it has to get denied first before I can move to the next step. I think they are trying to come up with an answer but it isn't the same answer as I think works best. It is a process.
 
Back
Top