Benefits Cut...

[Sub_Guy]

It likely wouldn't be much more effort than is already being done.  Hotels, cabs, car rentals etc are already being provided as part of your claim adding a few more receipts is not the end of the world.  Claims X isn't that hard to use either.

But you did get me thinking that people might just start spending the amounts they are entitled to knowing that they have to provide receipts rather than eat on the cheap and pocket the rest. So the savings might not be worth the effort.

Having to keep meal receipts and having clerks go through them could be a pain.  I will use my current squadron for example,  let's say we send an Aurora away with 20 pers for two weeks, 14 days, 3 meals a day, that works out to 840 receipts.  Consider we seem to have a crew gone somewhere every 3 weeks (on average) the work load on our clerks would be overwhelming.  Keeping receipts for meals, in my opinion would be a bad idea, the system works just fine now. 

 

[dapaterson]

It'd be at least 3 receipts per day, for the duration of the claim.  Multiplied by the # of pers on TD.  Bit of extra paperwork. 

And, since the government doesn't pay for alcohol, every receipt would have to be reviewed and any drinks taken out.  Then the section 34 reviewer would also have to go over everything... (which already happens; it would just be longer).

Claims are already admin-heavy; adding more work would mean either more staff or long delays in getting paid.

 

[bridges]

I pity the poor soldier with a wife and kids that has a couple dogs and needs to explain to their kids that they can't bring them to their next posting because the cost is too high. If anyone has ever been posted with pets you'll know the cost is not cheap, kiss your posting allowance good-bye.

Sad but true.  We moved across the country with 3 cats, and spent about a month in a hotel waiting for the possession date on the new house.  (This was several years ago - I think they've cut that kind of thing significantly since then.)  Anyway, the hotel wanted to charge an addl $10 per day for the cats, and after some pleading on our part, they agreed to reduce it to a one-time fee of $50 or so.  Most of the other places en route didn't charge more $, but did stick us in smoking rooms. 

I'm one of those people who considers pets family members and would sooner cut cable, the internet or my own food allotment than leave one of them behind, but I know not everyone will make those choices with their personalized funding envelope.  Maybe the SPCAs and humane societies should get ready for more unwanted pets on their doorstep.  :not-again:

 

[Sub_Guy]

Am I reading the order wrong, doesn't it say the benefits regarding pets and stuff will now be taken care of by the personalized envelope?

So won't we will still get those?

 

[PuckChaser]

Maybe the SPCAs and humane societies should get ready for more unwanted pets on their doorstep.  :not-again:

Or they get released in the PMQs and become feral like Kingston and Uplands. That's even worse, at least the SPCA would try to find them a home.

 

[Dexen]

Here in Esquimalt while living in the shacks rations are going to cost $543 as of next month. That $543 is for 6 swipes of the meal card, which usually I only use 2 maybe 3 per day. It would be a totally different situation if I only paid for what I use.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Enough talk about IR, what about all the other benefits we are losing. I pity the poor soldier with a wife and kids that has a couple dogs and needs to explain to their kids that they can't bring them to their next posting because the cost is too high. If anyone has ever been posted with pets you'll know the cost is not cheap, kiss your posting allowance good-bye.

Sorry, but this seems alittle too over-the-top for me.  Its not like ALL $ benefits were cut, right?  Poor soldier with wife, kids and dogs still gets paid, still has $$ avail (personalized benefits) to pay for this.  Sure, it *dips* into the $ left in your bank account for a posting allowance, but isn't that $ part of what a PA is actually for ???

Having pets = personal choice.  Personalized benefits (those deemed non-essential but attributable to relocation, reimbursement of these expenses must not constitute personal gain).

In a case like this, or ones similar, I have to say it *seems* like ppl will be pissed-off because they will have less of a cash-out on their PBs because of their personal choice (having pets).  I don't think portraying that Johny and Susy Q will have to leave their beloved pets behind because Daddy's CFIRP benefits were cut is accurate, and any CF mbr who is a parent and uses that line with their kids... :

:2c:  I am far from an expert but that is how is seems/reads to me.

 

[dapaterson]

Am I reading the order wrong, doesn't it say the benefits regarding pets and stuff will now be taken care of by the personalized envelope?

So won't we will still get those?

That's the way it reads.  It just comes out of a different envelope.

 

[Strike]

Enough talk about IR, what about all the other benefits we are losing. I pity the poor soldier with a wife and kids that has a couple dogs and needs to explain to their kids that they can't bring them to their next posting because the cost is too high. If anyone has ever been posted with pets you'll know the cost is not cheap, kiss your posting allowance good-bye.

Wow.  Greedy much?  That allowance is there to help cover incidentals not covered in Custom.  It is not an extra bit of money that you can automatically use to pay down your mortgage.

You realize that anyone with a horse had to pay out of their own pocket.  And I can name off a good dozen people who have had to do that because the CF moved them and, since horses are considered livestock, they weren't covered at all.  Considerably higher in cost than kenneling/flying a couple of dogs or cats (which is still getting covered, just not in custom).

 

[bridges]

Or they get released in the PMQs and become feral like Kingston and Uplands. That's even worse, at least the SPCA would try to find them a home.

Yup - if they have enough room to keep them more than a couple of days.

[tangent alert]  When Rockcliffe closed a few years ago, several cats were left behind to their own devices, which is not good in an Ottawa winter; local animal welfare agencies wanted to go in & collect them but were prevented from doing so, as the whole place was fenced off and access denied.  I'm betting the same thing will happen in Toronto with the closure & redevelopment of the Qs there. 

Pets are a lifestyle choice, but a highly beneficial & health-supporting one for many people.  Glad to see TB has kept an option to defer the expenses of bringing them along.  :nod:

 

[bridges]

Here in Esquimalt while living in the shacks rations are going to cost $543 as of next month. That $543 is for 6 swipes of the meal card, which usually I only use 2 maybe 3 per day. It would be a totally different situation if I only paid for what I use. Paying $543 out of pocket and losing $400 per month is a $943 swing on my Os salary.

That, to me, gets to the crux of the matter.  And I'm betting other people in similar situations did not know, ahead of time, that the IR benefits would be cut during their posting.  Whether L1s knew it or not.

I think if the CF wants to mitigate the damage of the IR cuts, both financially and in terms of mbrs' trust, they may want to consider not shackling affected pers to rations expenses like the ones described above.    :2c:

 

[Jed]

In Camp Faoaur the Austrians had a solution for all those feral cats and dogs. Little Johnnie and Suzie Q probably would not have appreciated the solution.  >

 

[PMedMoe]

What about service couples?  If one is posted to another location, and the other is not, it is not the choice of the members to go IR, unless they release they have no other option.  This new policy is going to sting for those members.

Exactly.  I should request a fucking posting....  :

  I've seen several cynical comments written here about IR and the benefits involved. IR is not a gravy train as it was referred to. It is a benefit to offset additional burdens to a family during a geographic separation. There are hundreds+ CF members on IR due to the fact that their families CANNOT be with them, whether it be due to employment or medical reasons, or with that said a married service couple. IR is abused, there is no questioning that, but have you seen a Cpl with enough clout to sneak him/herself into an IR posting and "abuse" it?

IR needs to be administered properly, and that starts with the senior leaders who quite often enable it. There are going hundreds+ families driven into extreme hardships, and for anybody to say something as stupid as "if you don't like it get out" or that "pink slips need to be handed out" you really need to pull your heads out of your ----'s, because you are not as important as you believe you are.

Idiotic  comments and backwards thinking  because it doesn't affect you directly doesn't go far in supporting you brothers and sisters in arms.

:goodpost:

 

[codboymt]

Not to beat a dead horse, but I just want to clarify...
I am currently in St. John's doing training for the NET (now WENG Tech) program. I have one semester left. I am considered TD and not IR, yes?  Both terms have been floated around interchangeably when referring to the group of us who are here and separated from our family. My biggest concern is that I will NOT be able to afford my last semester here. It seems silly that I may have to consider taking a loan out to complete the training necessary to do the job I have been hired to do.

 

[McG]

I am considered TD and not IR, yes? 

You may be, or not.  You might be prohibited, which is something else again.  As a start point, you need to look at your last posting message.

 

[codboymt]

You may be, or not.  You might be prohibited, which is something else again.  As a start point, you need to look at your last posting message.

Thanks,  I'm pretty sure we're not considered 'prohibited'. We were told TD for the longest time but lately they've been saying IR. I'll have to check with my div. staff tomorrow, it'll be quicker than digging out my posting message and we're in exam week, not a stress I needed right now.

 

[Disenchantedsailor]

Folks after just having time to read this particular thread let's put some perspective on this.
The department has to slash 1.9 Billion dollars, in a short amount of time.

So IR (a personal choice) doesnt look like a gravy train any more maybe just maybe it'll dissuade some folks from going on Chosen restrictions for 5 years or more.
TAA for Class B personnel really, they are working full time, someone try to show me anywhere that another government department pays their full time employees to drive to work.  It's called a full time job, if you don't like it McDonald's is always hiring.
IRP Benefits, ok maybe a little odd in the areas they chose to cut or shift but really, I've had 6 moves and made money on every one of them, lets stop bitching before FRP comes back

 

[Dexen]

Folks after just having time to read this particular thread let's put some perspective on this.
The department has to slash 1.9 Billion dollars, in a short amount of time.

So IR (a personal choice) doesnt look like a gravy train any more maybe just maybe it'll dissuade some folks from going on Chosen restrictions for 5 years or more.
TAA for Class B personnel really, they are working full time, someone try to show me anywhere that another government department pays their full time employees to drive to work.  It's called a full time job, if you don't like it McDonald's is always hiring.
IRP Benefits, ok maybe a little odd in the areas they chose to cut or shift but really, I've had 6 moves and made money on every one of them, lets stop bitching before FRP comes back

I don't think you understand.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

I don't think you understand.

Articulate and informative post. Enlighten us.

Where should those 1.9billion in savings come from instead? Please tell me.

 

[dogger1936]

Articulate and informative post. Enlighten us.

Where should those 1.9billion in savings come from instead? Please tell me.

Make MP's serve 25 years to get their pensions would be a start!