Pay protection from one Class "C" contract to another

[telltale]

Looking for a little help here. I have read through section 1 of CBI 204 and have found nothing to help me.

Hopefully someone can point me in the right direction.

I completed a Class "C" contract in which I was paid Lt 6 on pay scale E (CFR) at 6186$ per month.

I returned to the Class "B" world where I was promoted to Capt.

I am about to start another Class "C" contract, but seeing that I only have a few days in the rank of Capt, they are offering me Capt 0, which makes 5800$ per month.

Can someone point me to the ref, if any, that states that my pay should be protected. The only ref that I found that talks about pay protection has to do with compulsory occupational transfers.

Thank you

 

[dapaterson]

On promotion to Capt, the following should have applied to you:

204.52(6) (Rate of pay on promotion) An officer to whom this instruction applies shall be paid on promotion at the rate of pay which is the greater of

  1. the basic rate of pay for the officer’s new rank and pay level; or
  2. the rate of pay for the pay increment and pay level for the officer’s new rank that is nearest to, but at least equal to, the sum of the rate of pay the officer was receiving on the day immediately prior to the date of promotion, plus an amount equal to the difference between the rate of pay established for pay increment 1 and pay increment Basic in the officer’s new rank, but not to exceed the rate of pay for the highest pay increment in the new rank.

Therefore, your class B Capt pay should be greater than or equal to your class B Lt pay (and, in turn, your class C Lt should have been greater than or equal to your class B Lt pay).

The other stipulation that may apply is:

204.015(3) (Determination of pay increments on transfer, re-enrolment or on commencement of Class “C” service) The determination of a member’s pay increment shall include all qualifying service as determined in paragraph (2) and shall take into consideration any other relevant factor set out in the following table as may be applicable to the member’s circumstance:
...
(c) placed on Class “C” service in their substantive rank with more than 120 hours notice, or has completed a 60 day period during which their pay was calculated in accordance with subparagraph (b), then effective 22 June 2006.  the greater of:
...
  2. the pay increment that is closest to but not less than the rate of pay they would have received in their employed rank, pay level and trade group, as applicable, under section 5 of this Chapter immediately prior to changing classes of service.

Thus, your class C capt pay cannot be less than your class B capt pay.

 

[telltale]

Thank you for the answer. I still have a few questions regarding this:

1. Granted, my class C Capt (0) pay is greater than my class B Capt (4) pay. 5800$/month vice 5673$/month ($186.50 x 365/12). The problem is that 5800$ is still less than what I was making two weeks ago as an LT CFR (6) on class C, which was $6186/month.

2. How can I get promoted, but get a drop in salary?

3. Thanks again.

 

[Biohazardxj]

Just a thought.  All the pay tables on line have been updated to reflect the cost of living adjustment that kicking in today.  Also, are you sure you are looking at the correct tables?    I'm CC for a reserve unit so I check this out for you on Tuesday if you wish. 

An employing unit can stipulate in the terms and condition (SOU) of a Class B or C contract the rank and the pay rate at which they are willing to pay.  It is up to the person applying for that job to decide if they are will to take a pay cut.  Normally you won't see the incentive level stipulated just the rank.

 

[telltale]

SGT-RMSCLK,

I noticed the new pay scales effective 1 April 2010. Although the rates have gone up slightly, it has no impact on my claim. It still will be receiving less than when I was an Lt on class C.

I just find it odd, that there is no provision for this sort of thing.

Any info you can find is greatly appreciated.

thanks again.

 

[PMedMoe]

Are you taking into consideration the fact that while on Cl C, you received full pay (100%) but while on Cl B, you'll only get the 85%?

 

[telltale]

Yes, the 85% / 100% is not the problem. Thanks anyways.

The problem is a CFR thing, that the CBI 204 does not seem to have a provision for.

 

[George Wallace]

Have someone explain to you all the regulations on "Vested Rights".

Please answer your PMs as well.

 

[telltale]

I found some talk about "vested rights" on the forum, but nothing pointing to an official ref.

Is their a QR&O, DAOD, CBI, etc... on vested rights?

thanks

 

[George Wallace]

OK?  I am trying to figure this out.  You claim to be CFR'ed and have been on Class "C" employment.  You claim to have just recently been promoted.  Have you not, in any of your Leadership training, ever had to do any research and navigation of CFAOs, QR&Os, DAODs, etc. in the performance of your duties?  Your credibility is really being put to the test here.

 

[Occam]

What the hell?

QR&O 204.07 and 204.072 (later CBI 204.07 and 204.072), dealing with vested rights to pay on promotion, were repealed by Treasury Board effective 1 April 2002 ??

Something doesn't sound right....

 

[George Wallace]

What the hell?

QR&O 204.07 and 204.072 (later CBI 204.07 and 204.072), dealing with vested rights to pay on promotion, were repealed by Treasury Board effective 1 April 2002 ??

Something doesn't sound right....

If you sift through all that, it seems to be there.

 

[telltale]

Maybe that is why I can not seem to find any info.. if it has been repealed...

 

[George Wallace]

:

READ


204.04(3) (Rate of pay on promotion) Subject to paragraphs (4) and (5), an officer or non-commissioned member shall be paid, on promotion to a higher rank, at the rate of pay established in the applicable CBI which is the greater of:

(a) the basic rate of pay for the member’s new rank and, if applicable, pay level and trade group; or

(b) the rate of pay for the pay increment and, if applicable, pay level and trade group, for the member’s new rank that is nearest to, but at least equal to, the sum of the rate of pay the member was receiving on the day immediately prior to the date of the promotion, plus an amount equal to the difference between the rate of pay established for pay increment 1 and pay increment Basic in the member’s new rank, but not to exceed the rate of pay for the highest pay increment in the new rank.


204.075 – RATE OF PAY ON PROMOTION – RETROACTIVE PAY INCREASE

When an officer or non-commissioned member has been promoted, and a revision of the rate of pay established in the CBI that applies to the member is approved after the date on which the member was promoted, as a result of which payment of the revised rate of pay for the member’s new rank and pay increment and, if applicable, pay level and trade group is to commence prior to the date of the member’s promotion, the member shall be paid from the date of the promotion at the rate of pay that is determined by the application of the CBI that determine the member’s rate of pay on promotion, as if the revised rates of pay had been approved prior to the date of the promotion.

 

[Occam]

Ah, they've removed the reference to "vested rights", as well as changed the CBI the reference comes under.  That must've kept someone employed for at least a few days...  ;D

 

[George Wallace]

Ah, they've removed the reference to "vested rights", as well as changed the CBI the reference comes under.  That must've kept someone employed for at least a few days...  ;D

Someone probably got assigned the task of removing redundant material, to cut down on translation costs and times.  ;D

As for the concern of Class "C" employment, as I understand it, the "Terms of Employment" that the member signs will state the pay level/IPC that they will get for that term of employment.  If the member is a certain rank, and given an offer for employment at a lower rank pay level/IPC then that is what the member will be paid, no matter what their actual rank may be.  A Major could have signed terms of employment at a Capt's pay level/IPC.  A MWO may have signed terms of employment at a WO's pay level.IPC.  It is all in the "Terms of Employment" that the member is offered.  Having rank has nothing to do with the "Terms" offered.  The member can either accept the terms or remain unemployed.  There are numerous msgs out offering employment, where it states that a certain rank is wanted, but a more senior rank may apply if they accept the lower rank pay/IPC.

Perhaps that adds to the topic at hand.

 

[CountDC]

or they can go back to the employer and request the pay level offer be changed to reflect their actual level ie I am IPC 4 so can we change that 0 to a 4?