Not Given Promised Pay Incentive DEO

[MidShipsMan]

During the recruitment process (DEO) I asked and was assured I would receive a Pay Level C, increment 2 for my civi education (Masters and PhD in a very applicable field to my occupation).

1st time: I asked following the aptitude test. Upon successful completion I asked about incentives for my education . The Recruiting Officer stated that they do provide incentives for academics RE: CBI 204.015 - Pay Increments. And stated the pay level that I could be eligible for.

2nd time: I asked again over the phone when I was sent my offer, at this point they deferred my question to the signing of the offer of enrollment meeting at the recruitment center.

3rd time: at the meeting, I was presented the pay schedule, with the lowest pay level highlighted for an Officer Cadet. I said, this is incorrect, and that I was promised Pay Level C, increment 2. The interviewer stated that I would be paid an incentive level and arrears to that level after completing BMOQ, and would be paid the base cadet level during basic. I was satisfied with this answer.

Unfortunately, I failed to ask for written documentation, and my offer of enrollment letter contains the incorrect rate. I have since attempted to remedy this, and have recently submitted a Payroll grievance concerning this act of omission.

My question is: I feel I was misled during the recruitment process, and am entitled to either A: my correct pay level, and any arrears, or B: a VOT where my pay level can be re-negotiated, or C: a release.

Under the articles for release.
(e) Irregular Enrolment. Applies to the release of an officer or non-commissioned member by reason of an irregular enrolment other than Item 1(d).

Does this apply for this situation? Or is this mainly for when the member provides fraudulent information during enrolment? In this case, the irregularity was on the part of the MND, not the member.

Since I have very little documentation to support my case, release looks like the most probably outcome. Does anyone have any experience or guidance on how to approach the release process with respect to this issue.

 

[tree hugger]

I'm surprised that a difference/mistake with pay increments is enough for you to consider release.... makes me scratch my head...

Grievances take some time, I'd just ride it out.

 

[George Wallace]

I doubt a grievance would be in order here.  If your Pay Scale is not on the Msg that outlined your offer and was sent to your first Posting, it is just a "he said; she said" case that can not be reasonably resolved.

If your only aim in joining the CAF is monetary, then perhaps your choice of careers is not the best one. 

 

[brihard]

I'm surprised that a difference/mistake with pay increments is enough for you to consider release.... makes me scratch my head...

Grievances take some time, I'd just ride it out.

Seems more to me that the issue is that one of his first experiences with the CAF is getting screwed over to the effect of several thousand dollars per year. If he is presenting the story accurately, I'd be pissed too. If recruiters promised one thing and then gave another, lesser, worse thing, then they're fulfilling an ugly stereotype that the institution must be guarding itself against.

 

[mariomike]

they deferred my question to the signing of the offer of enrollment meeting at the recruitment center.

my offer of enrollment letter contains the incorrect rate.

If you don't mind me asking, why did you sign it?

 

[RedcapCrusader]

I have heard of DEO having to collect OCdt Salary until completion of BMOQ, BOTC, and then are given backpay to their respective rank and IPC.

Generally, a Military Career Counselor will advise that you could be eligible for IPC and rank whatever, but until the results of the PLAR come in and you are presented an offer based on those results, nothing is official.

PLARs aren't just based on related education, practical work experience is also a factor. Having the education is great, but if you don't have any (or very little) work experience in the field, obviously you'll receive a lower "score"  and lower offer as a result.

However I'll also echo the above: If you're doing it for the money vice a rewarding career, I'd take Option C as well.

First lesson in the Canadian Armed Forces - nothing is promised unless it's in writing.

Second lesson - don't sign anything unless you actually agree with it.

Third lesson - keep copies of everything.

 

[MJP]

Seems more to me that the issue is that one of his first experiences with the CAF is getting screwed over to the effect of several thousand dollars per year. If he is presenting the story accurately, I'd be pissed too. If recruiters promised one thing and then gave another, lesser, worse thing, then they're fulfilling an ugly stereotype that the institution must be guarding itself against.

Damm straight.  We are our own worst enemy when it comes to this sort of thing.

If your only aim in joining the CAF is monetary, then perhaps your choice of careers is not the best one.

This isn't the military of old, it is just a job for many people.  It is the old guard and our stuck in the 60/70s HR model that are very much part of the problem.  If it is just a job then we need to sell it like that and make sure we are doing our part.  This isn't doing our part, and people will vote with their feet. 

I do urge the OP to not release based on this.  Grievances take time and it sounds like you have a decent case.

 

[mariomike]

If it is just a job then we need to sell it like that < snip >

I don't know about the selling part, but they don't shy away from using that word,

Canadian Armed Forces Jobs

CHECK OUT these "in demand" jobs

Browse Jobs

Part-time Jobs

etc...
http://www.forces.ca/en/home

 

[MidShipsMan]

-I will wait and see what happens with the grievance. But numerous people have told me it doesn't have much of a chance. LunchMeat gives good advice!

-I clearly state why I signed in the original post. I was told I'd get the correct rate after basic.

-Yes, ~600dollars a month is significant for me, and does make my career in the forces a lot less competitive than some of the opportunities I have in the private sector or gov't departments. I've been called a "careerist", "unpatriotic", "selfish", even a "little bitch" in front of my entire Division for filing this grievance. I do my duties, and I'm good at what I do. I'd appreciate it if people withheld their judgements or opinions and stuck to the question at hand.

I'm mainly wondering what kind of release would this entail? That is in case the grievance is refused and a VOT is denied. Just trying to be prepared.

 

[mariomike]

I was told I'd get the correct rate after basic.

 

[Infanteer]

Ignore the chattering about your motivation or that your services not needed.  Your grievance sounds like a valid one an I'd wait to see the outcome of it.  I'm unsure of why you've been derided by your chain of command in this issue - it ain't their money.  I was always supportive of my subordinates' financial grievances if, after reading through the documentation, I felt it was legitimate.  If it wasn't, I simply said I'm not certain it was supportable but passed it on without comment as a grievance is a legal entitlement under the QR&O (see section 29 of the National Defence Act).

Under the articles for release.
(e) Irregular Enrolment. Applies to the release of an officer or non-commissioned member by reason of an irregular enrolment other than Item 1(d).

Does this apply for this situation? Or is this mainly for when the member provides fraudulent information during enrolment? In this case, the irregularity was on the part of the MND, not the member.

The latter.  All Item 1 releases are under the category of misconduct on the part of the member and are usually the result of a disciplinary proceeding such as a court martial.  If you were to choose to release over this issue, it would fall under Item 4(c) - voluntary release (other causes).

Stick with your grievance and continue your service.  If events unfolded as you have described them, then someone got lazy with paperwork and you are not getting what other members in your situation are getting.

 

[MidShipsMan]

Thank you very much Infanteer. Outstanding wisdom.

 

[rnkelly]

As long as your education is indeed related to your occupation than I would agree with you that the appropriate pay scale would be C and IPC 2.  One IPC for each of your graduate degrees.  I would contact the MCC that assured you this would be the case or the MCC that did your enrolment interview and assured you the change would take place after Basic.  As your probably aware now it should have been in the enrolment papers but if the recruiting personnel told you otherwise than you have been aggrieved. 

On the bright side, it sounds like you have a great education that will put you in a great position to excel (if you decide to stay) and will give you preferential treatment in consideration for promotions later on (more money).

I question why you would not get written documentation since you make it abundantly clear that this was a condition for your enrolment but that's your problem.

Concur that it would be a 4C release but I'll add that it would be 4C before Occupation functional Point (OFP) which has some implications.  Mainly a 1 year delay before being eligible to reenrol and a waiver approval.

/signed/ an MCC that didn't promise you any IPCs

 

[meni0n]

I am just going to throw this in here for those that have been slamming this individual for the basis of his grievances. If any of you are/were in a leadership position, I hope you are well versed in the following point:  Treat subordinates fairly; respond to their concerns, represent their interests. If I have a subordinate that comes to me for help in filing a grievance, I put away any sort of judgments or prejudices that I might have and I help this individual in any way that I can. Why? Because it is my duty as a leader to do this. I am not there to judge them, I am there to guide them and provide advice within my capacity.

If that individual believes that they have been wronged, it is within their right to file a grievance and no one within their chain of command should be looking down upon them or trying to shame them for doing so. I would encourage MidShipMan to contact a harassment adviser if anyone from your chain of command have publicly or privately have said the kind of things that he revealed. Also, there would be a breach of privacy as the grievance is a PROTECTED matter. These kind of things are not tolerated in the CF.

 

[RedcapCrusader]

I am just going to throw this in here for those that have been slamming this individual for the basis of his grievances. If any of you are/were in a leadership position, I hope you are well versed in the following point:  Treat subordinates fairly; respond to their concerns, represent their interests. If I have a subordinate that comes to me for help in filing a grievance, I put away any sort of judgments or prejudices that I might have and I help this individual in any way that I can. Why? Because it is my duty as a leader to do this. I am not there to judge them, I am there to guide them and provide advice within my capacity.

If that individual believes that they have been wronged, it is within their right to file a grievance and no one within their chain of command should be looking down upon them or trying to shame them for doing so. I would encourage MidShipMan to contact a harassment adviser if anyone from your chain of command have publicly or privately have said the kind of things that he revealed. Also, there would be a breach of privacy as the grievance is a PROTECTED matter. These kind of things are not tolerated in the CF.

Let me just clarify, my intention was not to alienate, it was simply to state that IF they were more willing to release than to go through with a lengthy and often difficult grievance despite having a rewarding career in a great organization, then maybe they should look elsewhere anyway.

Otherwise, I fully agree with you.

 

[George Wallace]

...... One IPC for each of your graduate degrees. 

On what authority are you making this claim?

 

[mariomike]

MidShipsMan

I'm a non-professional.

But, if I had a recruiting or pay related situation like yours, the person I would reach out to for help is DAA because he is an expert on such matters.
He has helped many others. I'm surprised he has not responded to your post yet as questions like this are right up his alley.

 

[MidShipsMan]

Let me just clarify, my intention was not to alienate, it was simply to state that IF they were more willing to release than to go through with a lengthy and often difficult grievance despite having a rewarding career in a great organization, then maybe they should look elsewhere anyway.

Otherwise, I fully agree with you.

-So far its been a 13 month process since BMOQ ended. At least 5 trips to the BOR, numerous meetings with my CoC, and assisting Officer. Otherwise, I can't overstate how rewarding my military career has been.

-I'm witholding my unit, occupation, and the details of my education, because those are personal details that don't have any bearing on the generality of this situation. And the military is small.
How about we pretend I'm a DEO pilot with a Masters in Atmospheric Sciences, and PhD project in an Aeronautical Engineering topic. No one ever questions the applicability of my credentials in my case.

-The harassment and shaming is what it is. We dealt with it directly. I have to choose my battles.

Any ongoing insights into how I can move forward through the VOT or release process is helpful. The grievance will just run its course, and the decision will have to be lived with.

 

[rnkelly]

On what authority are you making this claim?

None but I have seen it done that way in the past which isn't exactly a guarantee, my bad.  The real problem lies with what the CFRC promised though.  The CF is responsible for what the CFRC states to the applicant/enrollee even if what was stated is not consistent with policy which may or may not be the case here(recent judicial reviews confirm this).

Again, I think the OP would be wise to contact their CFRC of enrolment to see if there's any documentation with respect to pay entitlements for education because without proof it will be tough slogging.

 

[ModlrMike]

I think that the root of this issue is that CFRC is probably not in a position to promise anything. The recruiter can suggest that one may be offered xyz, but the ultimate decision lies further upstream.

It is perhaps not an unusual circumstance that an applicant hears "will" where "may" was said. Not that this is necessarily the case in this instance, but one's proof is only worth the paper it's written on.