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

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

max32xmax

Guest
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
10
After recently damaging my personal phone, a hypothetical discussion took place with regards to an expectation that we are to be available for contact off-duty or on leave.

Before going further, I made it clear that it was my intention to replace the damaged device within a reasonable time frame, and that as a professional, I should also be expected to reasonably return any work-related call. Turns out one of the other guys in the room was recently threatened a charge after the MWO was unable to reach him on his cell (it was something trivial, but the MWO was pretty annoyed).

It's been my belief that members are (or should be) only legally obligated to respond to an issued pager or duty phone, with the exception of a superior officer ordering us to obtain a civilian phone (which could then be asked for in writing and financially reimbursed). I don't think I have any legal obligation to repair my damaged phone, just like the other guy had no obligation to replace (or even answer) his. The argument of my superior was that things are different because we are in the emergency services (i.e. base fire hall), and that the CF needs a reliable way of getting ahold of us when off-duty or on leave.

I don't intend on challenging the status-quo (mostly because I don't want to see us wind up with issued devices 24/7), but any idea where this might be spelled out? Any truth to the written order & reimbursement thought?

Thanks,

Max.
 
Do you have a land line? If no and you rely solely on your cell phone, then I fully side with your supervisor. It's your responsibility to have a contact method. Just like if you have a text only plan, that is not a sufficient means of contact. You'll never get re-imbursement for a civi phone, because then it becomes a military device. When soldiers are on IRU they must have a sufficient method of contact. If you don't want to be contacted out side of work hours then don't work with us, calls at odd hours are part of the territory. Even more so for us WOs and up
 
You have an obligation to provide functioning contact information to you chain of command.  If you choose not to answer your phone because the government did not give it to you and you are screening your calls, then your CoC would have good cause to correct you.

If you fail to keep your contact information current with your CoC, then they would again have good cause to correct you.

You will not get reimbursement for a civi phone.
 
Just for (my own) future reference, do you guys have something to back that up?
 
Not right now, but it's common place to have a contact plan for your troops. Can't claim ignorance out of laziness
 
I agree, we had to deal with something similar recently and for the lack of substantiation, we ended up loaning the person a beeper so we had means of contacting the person.
 
I'd be looking at that situation hard before issuing any device. Because now you're unit has set precedence and you need to be careful of that. Why not just keep them in the duty centre until they sort themselves out if on IRU or stand by. That's what my SSM was willing to do with this young trooper in question when we found out he had a text only phone and no intent of changing it
 
To be honest, it was a one off (the individual was a special case), and the time and effort spent into looking deep wasn't worth it, especially since we have quite a few extra beepers and we were in a crazy busy op  tempo.  I didn't want my people wasting any time. 

One thing for sure, I wasn't going to recommend a Blackberry...
 
I'm with Max...............I'd like to see that in writing somewhere.
YOU need me then YOU supply the way to do that......................
 
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.

 
Yup. Although the bureaucrat/doctrine in me says 'you give your team the tools that you expect them to use', the realist quickly answers 'we can always make an example out of teammates that make things difficult’. Case in point for the difficult member above, or giving them a mobile device that will go off once daily until they "sort themselves out". Guess the answer depends on the situation, but I wouldn’t expect whoever gets the duty center treatment to be very motivated [read: possibly toxic] anytime in the near future (just thoughts from reward management / motivation theory).

Where is the line drawn WRT a reasonable means of contact? Are e-mails comparable to a land-line? Is a phone with a talk plan but no voicemail acceptable? Sparing very limited disposable income, I suppose it comes back to professionalism. While the prompt returning of calls/messages/e-mails is part of this for all of us, and this extends to more than just keeping and reasonably checking a phone plan for certain trades/roles, I wouldn’t hesitate to plan a 6-day backcountry ski tour on my regular 6 off without a leave pass & without directly informing work in my current role & global situation.

Just my opinion, & looks like there's no pretty black/white answer.
 
I actually sailed with a fellow sup tech and this was his scenario.  The only different mitigating factor was that he was living in shacks and the B Warden or what have you was his poc.  As I understand it we would have to physically get the member too.

This was back in 2001-2003 on Preserver.
 
Tango18A said:
I'd be looking at that situation hard before issuing any device. Because now you're unit has set precedence and you need to be careful of that. Why not just keep them in the duty centre until they sort themselves out if on IRU or stand by. That's what my SSM was willing to do with this young trooper in question when we found out he had a text only phone and no intent of changing it

Because that would be an unofficial punishment, likely an abuse of authority and make whoever is doing it a fucktard.


Corrected myself;  I misread your post and thought you meant to keep them on IRU or standby;  if they are on standby/IRU, they should be able to be contacted 24/7.

Another option is to have them free to do whatever, but they must call in to Ops every say, 15 or 30 minutes...likely won't be long before they change their cell plan.

I am at a unit and in a position that holds Standby regularly.  I have the obligation to be able to be contacted 24 hours a day.  I then, as the member, have a choice to either  (1) provide my cell phone number or (2) sit in my house so I don't miss a call on my landline. Sounds fun.

If I decided to not have either, I'd guess that I'd likely have some type of unpleasant alternative imposed on me during my Standby period. 
 
Does that mean phone bills can be tax deductible as an Employment Expense?  :christmas happy:
 
max32xmax said:
Sparing very limited disposable income, I suppose it comes back to professionalism.

I've noticed with a tiny bit of creativity people who cite very limited income can often cut out a few things like xbox's, online game subscriptions, drinking alcohol every week-end.
 
max32xmax said:
The argument of my superior was that things are different because we are in the emergency services (i.e. base fire hall), < snip >

It must depend on the organization. Fire and Paramedic emergency services, in the city I worked, had a formal, written and easily understood Standby and Call-Back Policy.


 
Jarnhamar said:
I've noticed with a tiny bit of creativity people who cite very limited income can often cut out a few things like xbox's, online game subscriptions, drinking alcohol every week-end.

Citing limited income may result in the CoC taking a close look at your expenditures and then being placed on administrative measures.

There is absolutely no reason why someone in this day and age can't afford a land line or a cheap cell phone.
 
Bruce Monkhouse said:
I'm with Max...............I'd like to see that in writing somewhere.
YOU need me then YOU supply the way to do that......................

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. 
 
SF2 said:
Does that mean phone bills can be tax deductible as an Employment Expense?  :christmas happy:

You're already reimbursed for this in the form of the 7.5% of your pay envelope defined as the "military factor", which is there to compensate you, in part, for the unique demands of military service.


Edited to correct the rate to 7.5%.
 
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%.
 
Back
Top