Leave - Recall and Other Issues [MERGED]

[Lumber]

I was of the understanding that leave passes don't even need to be signed by the member. They can be signed off by the CoC without the member signing their part.

Maybe this isn't the case, but I've seen it done quite often, people adding weeks onto post deployment leave etc.

Agreed. I've always assumed that this was why the "Requested by" section is left blank when Monitor Mass fills out a leave pass. If a member is away, then any one of his supervisors can "request" on his behalf, so they fill out and sign their names in the "requested by" section.

 

[Pusser]

I was of the understanding that leave passes don't even need to be signed by the member. They can be signed off by the CoC without the member signing their part.

Maybe this isn't the case, but I've seen it done quite often, people adding weeks onto post deployment leave etc.

Considering that legal opinions have been rendered supporting the idea that one can be ordered to take leave, then this is certainly OK.

 

[CountDC]

The only signature I look for is the approving one.

The mbrs signature spot is left blank in MM because the mbrs information is already on the leave pass at the top.  No need to type the name in again as it is just a signature block.  No one else should sign there though.  If the mbr is ordered on leave and not able/willing to sign then just have a copy of the order attached, CO sign leave pass and submit. If the mbr requested the leave via email attach it.  if it was telecon then scribble a note and attach.  If when the mbr gets their leave report they challenge any of the entires the supporting docs area there.

 

[Lumber]

The only signature I look for is the approving one.

The mbrs signature spot is left blank in MM because the mbrs information is already on the leave pass at the top.  No need to type the name in again as it is just a signature block.  No one else should sign there though.  If the mbr is ordered on leave and not able/willing to sign then just have a copy of the order attached, CO sign leave pass and submit. If the mbr requested the leave via email attach it.  if it was telecon then scribble a note and attach.  If when the mbr gets their leave report they challenge any of the entires the supporting docs area there.

That box says "Requested by", so I've operated by taking that wording at face value.

If a supervisor is trying to submit a leave pass on behalf of one of their subordinates (with Class-As this happens a lot), I get them to put their name in that block and to sign it, as they are the ones "requesting" the leave.

 

[runormal]

That box says "Requested by", so I've operated by taking that wording at face value.

If a supervisor is trying to submit a leave pass on behalf of one of their subordinates (with Class-As this happens a lot), I get them to put their name in that block and to sign it, as they are the ones "requesting" the leave.

When would a CLS A member have to submit a leave pass? Maybe my unit works differently, but I've never filled out a leave pass. (I do inform my COC via email whenever I go outside of the area for more than a day and a give as much contact information as possible in case something were to happen).

 

[Lumber]

When would a CLS A member have to submit a leave pass? Maybe my unit works differently, but I've never filled out a leave pass. (I do inform my COC via email whenever I go outside of the area for more than a day and a give as much contact information as possible in case something were to happen).

When proceeding on Class B and C contracts. A member gets tasked to teach BMNQ for the summer at CFFS(Q) in Valcartier. They want to drive, but it takes two days to drive to Valcartier, so they need to take a day of paid-leave (within their contract) in addition to the one day of travel that the school initially offered. Since all of this is being done by me and my day staff, we can put Requested by: "LT(N) XXX" in their place.

I've actually signed the leave pass in all 3 spaces before. I signed the "requested by", the "recommended", and even the "Approved By" with an attached email from the CO stating that he approved the leave and to sign on his behalf.

 

[runormal]

When proceeding on Class B and C contracts. A member gets tasked to teach BMNQ for the summer at CFFS(Q) in Valcartier. They want to drive, but it takes two days to drive to Valcartier, so they need to take a day of paid-leave (within their contract) in addition to the one day of travel that the school initially offered. Since all of this is being done by me and my day staff, we can put Requested by: "LT(N) XXX" in their place.

I've actually signed the leave pass in all 3 spaces before. I signed the "requested by", the "recommended", and even the "Approved By" with an attached email from the CO stating that he approved the leave and to sign on his behalf.

Makes sense, seen. I was unaware as I've never done any class b outside of courses.  Thanks  :cheers:

 

[Lumber]

Makes sense, seen. I was unaware as I've never done any class b outside of courses.  Thanks  :cheers:

It could even happen for your courses.

You earn leave during your courses, and depending on the situation, sometimes the leave pass for that leave is completed by us at the unit before you leave. So in that case my team would be preparing that leave pass without you around.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

You are authorizing leave before the leave has been 'earned' then, no?  What if the mbr is sick or something and is RTUd Day 2 of the tasking of course?

 

[dapaterson]

You are authorizing leave before the leave has been 'earned' then, no?  What if the mbr is sick or something and is RTUd Day 2 of the tasking of course?

Advancing leave is common.  Otherwise, no one in the Reg F could take more than 8 annual in July.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

If you are just Cl B and get RTUd from a course, you don't stay on Cl B though and wouldn't 'earn' leave days. 

Reg Frce people don't have the same issue 99.99% of the time. 

 

[dapaterson]

If you are just Cl B and get RTUd from a course, you don't stay on Cl B though and wouldn't 'earn' leave days. 

Reg Frce people don't have the same issue 99.99% of the time.

How many Reservists would have that problem?  Do we make policy to disadvantage 99%+ of people for who it won't be an issue? 

 

[CountDC]

same as when a reg f mbr overuses their leave - we recover from the pay.

We publish the deduction to their pay account putting it into the red.  if they don't work and release it will be recovered from any moneys owed to him.  If that doesn't zero it then it goes to JAG with anything else outstanding for recovery action.

When RTU you may stay on Cl B and be employed at the home unit. 

 

[Eye In The Sky]

How many Reservists would have that problem?  Do we make policy to disadvantage 99%+ of people for who it won't be an issue?

We are still talking about the CAF, right?  8)   

Damn right then!  :rofl:

This is just 'new' then I guess...when I was Res, and on Cl B, we couldn't use it before we 'earned it'. 

 

[dapaterson]

We are still talking about the CAF, right?  8)   

Damn right then!  :rofl:

This is just 'new' then I guess...when I was Res, and on Cl B, we couldn't use it before we 'earned it'.

There's no policy bar to doing it; there are, however, numerous local interpretations that appear designed to piss people off, just because they can.

 

[CountDC]

That box says "Requested by", so I've operated by taking that wording at face value.

If a supervisor is trying to submit a leave pass on behalf of one of their subordinates (with Class-As this happens a lot), I get them to put their name in that block and to sign it, as they are the ones "requesting" the leave.

Requested by is the member, info already at top of leave pass, no need for anyone else information to go in there.  The supervisor isn't requesting on behalf of the mbr as the mbr must have requested it somehow whether verbally or in writing unless they have been ordered on leave so there should be something reflecting that such as a supervisor note that Cpl Bloggins called at 1100h 1 Jun 2016 requesting leave for date from date to.  The supervisor should be recommending instead. 

But in reality most leave clerks are only looking for the one signature - approved.  Everything else is only a concern if Bloggins disputes he was on leave during that period.  Much easier if there is something showing that he did and a supervisor signing a leave pass in the requested section does not show this.

EIS - that was changed a while ago.  Now everything is almost the same as reg f except how many days you earn for the year (24) and you don't get 2 days for every partial month you work (still based on every 15 days giving 1 day).

 

[63 Delta]

All compassionate leave requests must be substantiated to the satisfaction of the approving authority.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/caf-community-benefits/leave-policy.page#chap7

What level of substantiation is reasonable for compassionate leave? Example, if a member has a spouse who is dealing with an illness, what is reasonable to ask for proof?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Your Commanding Officer is really the final judge of what consistutes proof, since he/she is the approving authority for Compassionate Leave.

 

[ballz]

Exactly that, unless you are looking for more than 14 days compassionate at which point a higher authority becomes the approving authority.

The document outlines that they are looking for "substantiation" rather than "proof." It is up to the CO if he wants to take the member's word at face value, request some kind of documents, have the padre follow up, or whatever. But you could literally produce no "proof" whatsoever, if the CO decides your reason is substantial enough to warrant giving you time off to deal with it, then he can do that without asking for any "proof" at all.

 

[Good2Golf]

Exactly that, unless you are looking for more than 14 days compassionate at which point a higher authority becomes the approving authority.

The document outlines that they are looking for "substantiation" rather than "proof." It is up to the CO if he wants to take the member's word at face value, request some kind of documents, have the padre follow up, or whatever. But you could literally produce no "proof" whatsoever, if the CO decides your reason is substantial enough to warrant giving you time off to deal with it, then he can do that without asking for any "proof" at all.

As well, if the nature of the substantiation is private, you can request to speak directly with the CO.  Unless the CO has put one in place, there is not a 'vetting' process to go through to get the request approved, it is the CO's call.  I have seen in the past some units require that the member speak with the Padre, but that should be as further support to the member, not an approval gate to get to the CO.

:2c:

Regards
G2G