Temporary Duty ( TD ) merged

[Occam]

Small observation if I may.  They will only pay mileage above and beyond what the member usually incurs, yes?  So they will not pay the full 100 kms (or whatever) but the difference between this and the normal work commute.

Eg:  New commute 100 kms - Normal commute 15 kms = 85 kms x 2 (round trip).

Now, to completely muddy the waters...

Hypothetical situation - if the member resided 30 km from normal place of duty, but 100 from the temporary workplace, would they then be eligible for 70 km at high rate, plus (30-16 = 14 km) at the low rate for Transportation Assistance, as dapaterson mentioned above?  The reservist is allowed to claim TA for anything over 16 km to perform duty.  The mind boggles...

 

[George Wallace]

and for us clerks that don't have the knowledge we are taught on every course we do how to look up and find the information - it is called Pub Searches.  This members clerks gave him an answer without providing the regulations and then when confronted with one they fluffed it off instead of checking it fully.  Lack of knowledge or experience does not wash in this case - this is something that even a QL3 clerk should have been able to answer.

True, but I am seeing a lot of "Other Trades" filling Clerk postions these days.  Not too many Infanteers getting their RMS QL Crses.

 

[Snakedoc]

True, but I am seeing a lot of "Other Trades" filling Clerk postions these days.  Not too many Infanteers getting their RMS QL Crses.

This I have often seen at my unit as well.

 

[CountDC]

True, but I am seeing a lot of "Other Trades" filling Clerk postions these days.  Not too many Infanteers getting their RMS QL Crses.

and if that is the case then they should be asking a clerk to verify the info rather than giving an answer they do not have the knowledge to give. When I started in the fin office as a private in the infantry I hounded the crap out of the HQ clerks, dug through the pubs and went through the cabinets in the office to see what had been done prior.  Sorry but I do not like excuses when it comes to money regardless of trade - if you don't know the answer then admit it and at least contact someone else to get it.

Are not the units still given a Reg F RMS Clerk? When I check as far as I can see each unit still has the RSS posn.

As for not getting the RMS 3's - why not?  If they are doing the job might as well do the course. Is it a case now where they will not give the training unless the member remusters? (sounds like something they would do, I was still infantry when I did my QL5 Fin and Fin when I did QL5 Admin).

Myself, I see one of the biggest problem is within the trade.  It used to be that it was instilled (still is by some) that if you worked in the OR then everyone on the other side of the counter was a customer and it was your job to take care of them.  More and more I see clerks showing up that are never taught this - instead they have the attitude that the member is privileged to have them serve them. A lot of supervisors seem to just want to protect their staff rather than correct a short coming. Protecting staff is important but not at the expense of the customer.

Guess I am just too old for the modern clerk world - I still believe it is our job to take care of the customer. Mind you I also believe that amalgamation was a bad move, fin course standards should never have been lowered and CEP Techs should still exist.  Does it not scare any of you that the people now doing pay are only required to score a 70% accuracy rate?  What ever happened to 90%?

 

[dapaterson]

Positions do not equal people - last time I checked, under 75% of RFC (used to be RSS) postions were filled within the Army.  In addition, it takes more than a single clerk to keep a unit running - particulalry in the Reserves, where pay admin is a much more complex and time consuming task than in the Reg F (I remember a course in Borden in the 90s, where Reg F pay was covered in a week, and Res pay in an afternoon).

 

[Zoomie]

It's good to see the RMS clerks wading in here and setting us right.

This situation is not quite so cut and dry methinks.  The original poster accepted a B-Class job with the understanding that the workplace was going to be 100kms away, correct?  He is not a RegF augmentee that is being tasked for 3 months to work out of a new workplace 100kms away.

With the above references and the rationale posted.  Any PRes soldier could apply for and accept a B-Class that is hundreds of KMs away from his current armoury and then claim high rate for the commute.  A 48th Highlander could apply for and be accepted for a job in Ottawa working days and claim the 1000kms total distance each day.  A bit far-fetched I admit, but where does the grey area begin?

 

[dapaterson]

For extreme distances a cost move would be authorised, or the member would request SCA in lieu of a cost move.  In your example, the 48th soldier's normal workplace would be Ottawa for the class B - and therefore would only be eligible for commuting assistance (though I can't see anyone in Ottwa authorising such a hiring).

In this case:  Normal work place form the position he accepted was local (more or less), now there is a tasking to deliver training ~100km away.  As with anyone, the job location is different; the member's responsibility is to get to their normal workplace; the Crown is responsible for the extra distance.

 

[Forgotten_Hero]

First - smack your clerks that are not taking care of you.

CFTDI definitions:

temporary duty (TD)” means the time spent to attend a course or perform a duty for a period of six months or less (excluding CF members on BTL training), at a place outside the location of the member’s unit, including travelling time to the place of TD and return.

Section 5 of CFTDI Travel within Headquarters Area – No overnight stay

enough said on paragraph title - pretty straight forward.

How about this from CFTDI:

5.13  Temporary Workplace Change

(1)  A member is normally responsible to get to and from work on a daily basis.  However, if a member is assigned to a temporary workplace, i.e., on training, promotion board, short term work assignment, etc., the member is entitled to be reimbursed additional transportation costs over and above the normal commuting distance when transportation is not provided.  The provisions of this directive shall apply for the duration of the workplace change, to a maximum of sixty (60) calendar days. If transportation is provided and the member does not want to use the government provided transportation, there is no further entitlement to transportation expenses.

Bloody clerks that don't want to do their jobs.  You are entitled to high rate of mileage no matter how they try to slice it. You are either on TD or you are on Temporary Workplace Change.  Tell them to choose and pay you your money.  Bet if it was one of them they would find this quick enough.

If it was me I would simply log into Claims X, raise the mtec using the unit fin code and submit for approval.  Section 32 approval - CO/RSM hand delivered (pick the one you think will get the best response).

if they paid you high rate for 100kms it would be somewhere in the range of $50 a day tax free.  Using the estimate 20 work days a month that is $1000.

Now go get them and force them to do their jobs.

That is exactly how I interpreted the reference. I've been researching the subject since February and that is the conclusion I came to. I'm not sure how do procede from here, as I dont think the MTEC would get anywhere. They'll tell me that I'm not eligible for high rate because I'm not on TD. I'm not on TD because I am not provided overnight accomodation.

Further, when bringing this up to my chain of command, the response I got was "Its probably in some obscure reference somewhere you'll never find on the DIN that says that in order to be eligible for TD you must have overnight stay".

 

[Forgotten_Hero]

This situation is not quite so cut and dry methinks.  The original poster accepted a B-Class job with the understanding that the workplace was going to be 100kms away, correct?

When I accepted the job, I accepted it being in city A. Half way through my contract (not even actually) it got moved to City B, which is 100km away from city A.

Any PRes soldier could apply for and accept a B-Class that is hundreds of KMs away from his current armoury and then claim high rate for the commute.  A 48th Highlander could apply for and be accepted for a job in Ottawa working days and claim the 1000kms total distance each day.  A bit far-fetched I admit, but where does the grey area begin?

In that case, the employing unit would be Ottawa and the 1000km would constitute his normal commute, no?

 

[Occam]

This situation is not quite so cut and dry methinks.  The original poster accepted a B-Class job with the understanding that the workplace was going to be 100kms away, correct?  He is not a RegF augmentee that is being tasked for 3 months to work out of a new workplace 100kms away.

Nope, that's not what he said (and I hope he got it correct the first time). 

"Whats happening is, I signed onto the contract to teach on some courses in city A and myunit of employment is in city A. The first course finished, no problems there. The second one started, but this time, its being run in city B and I travel there daily to teach."

With the above references and the rationale posted.  Any PRes soldier could apply for and accept a B-Class that is hundreds of KMs away from his current armoury and then claim high rate for the commute.  A 48th Highlander could apply for and be accepted for a job in Ottawa working days and claim the 1000kms total distance each day.  A bit far-fetched I admit, but where does the grey area begin?

No, that scenario isn't possible because that would be the member's normal place of employment ("the single permanent location determined by the CF at or from which a CF member ordinarily is expected to perform the work of their position") , and would not be TD.  He would be eligible for Transportation Assistance, but that's moot if he has 10+ hours of commuting each day, right?

 

[Occam]

That is exactly how I interpreted the reference. I've been researching the subject since February and that is the conclusion I came to. I'm not sure how do procede from here, as I dont think the MTEC would get anywhere. They'll tell me that I'm not eligible for high rate because I'm not on TD. I'm not on TD because I am not provided overnight accomodation.

Further, when bringing this up to my chain of command, the response I got was "Its probably in some obscure reference somewhere you'll never find on the DIN that says that in order to be eligible for TD you must have overnight stay".

All you can do is escalate the problem.  Eventually, someone in your chain of command will call someone in the Compensation and Benefits world (who can speak authoritatively), and find out that you are indeed eligible for the high rate of travel.  If you get stonewalled, a grievance is the next step.  The initial authority (IA) for that is your CO, and I'm sure he'll get to the bottom of it in short order.

 

[CountDC]

Submit the claim with a copy of the the CFTDI 5 which clearly states NO OVERNIGHT STAY attached.  Then challenge them to show you where in there it says you are not entitled.

I am sitting in Ottawa and we pay these MTECs all the time.  I have just arranged for one of our members to work at another location for almost a month and we will be paying for the additional mileage which may only be 10kms a day. I just paid 2 claims for a mbr that was sent on a local course as it was not at his regular place of employment.  We have members that have to drive from their regular work site to my location once a week for a meeting and we pay on an mtec. All these claims are raised by RMS Clks or Log O's, approved sect 32 and 34 by clerks and Log O's. My previous section had days where 2 of us had to to travel to Kingston for the day and again we were paid on MTEC.

Who ever you are dealing with is wrong on this matter and also have the procedure wrong.  It is their job as SME to provide you with the regulation that shows you are not entitled, not yours to provide the regulation that you are (which you already have and they just ignored).

 

[Forgotten_Hero]

Ok, thanks a lot CountDC. Now, these MTECs, they give you the high rate? Does this still apply after that 60 calendar days you mentionned in your previous post?

 

[Forgotten_Hero]

CounterDC, I've got a question. To whom does the CFTDI apply to? I just braught up everything to my Chain of Command and they told me that that reference is irrelevant because the CFTDI doesnt apply to me (due to me not being on TD).
 

 

[dapaterson]

Your CoC needs a little education.

By virtue of sending you 100km away they have placed you on TD, whether they realize it or not.  The CFTDI describes the conditions under which TD occurs - you are "travelling outside the local area, no overnight stay" and therefore chapter 5 applies.

Your CoC wouldn't, by any chance, include the numbers 3 and 3?  That would explain a lot.

 

[Occam]

Your CoC wouldn't, by any chance, include the numbers 3 and 3?  That would explain a lot.

Unless he's changed units since then, his very first post gives that away.  And you'd be correct.  ;D

 

[Forgotten_Hero]

Depends how high you go... Why does it matter?

And again, Im told the CFTDI doesnt apply to me so they wont accept it as a reference.

 

[George Wallace]

Depends how high you go... Why does it matter?

And again, Im told the CFTDI doesnt apply to me so they wont accept it as a reference.

Well.  It looks like it is Redress of Grievance time.  You have all the References to back you up.  It will take time, but you may receive a great Christmas bonus in a few years time. 

 

[Occam]

Unbelievable.  A simple phone call or e-mail to DCBA is all it would take for them to realize that they're wrong, and they're going to force you to grieve it.

 

[Forgotten_Hero]

Ok. And just to clarify, is it TD or the high rate that I'm eligible for or is it both?