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.
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.