PMV and Travel Limits While on TD

[Lumber]

<I hope pusser doens't beat me to this....>

Good morning,
...
Any clarity would be great!

Your OR is wrong in someways, and right in others. There is a cap on PMV travel, in some cases, but the cap is kilometric distance, not a dollar value. I'll elaborate.

First, the CAF can't order you to drive your own vehicle; there are two way you can end up taking your own vehcile:

1. The CAF can request that you take your vehicle;
2. The CAF picks a different method of travel (train, plane, bus, etc), but YOU, the member, request to take your own vehicle instead.

In case #1, there is no cap at all. If the CO of your unit, who is the one who has ultimate authority to select the method of travel, decides that it is in the best interests of the CAF for your to take your vehicle, than he can request that you take your own vehicle. If you agree, then PMV becomes the "approved method of travel", and you will be reimbursed for the full cost of the travel. If it's a 1542km drive from Kingston to Halifax, for example, you will get 1542 kms x 0.555 cents/km (the Ontario kilometric rate) = $855.81.

In case #2, there is a cap. If the CO of your unit decides that it is in the best interests of the CAF for you to fly, you can request to take your PMV instead. This request does not have to be approved, but if the CO approves it and allows you to take your PMV, then you will on be reimbursed for the 1st day of travel. Since CAF members are not supposed to drive more than 500km in a single day, then the most you will be reimbursed for is 500km x 0.555 cents/km = $277.5

*Note 1: This exampl is just one way travel. The same applies for return travel. In case #2, the total would be $555 (500km each way x 0.555cents/km)
**Note 2: Every province has a different "kilometric rate" which can be found in the National Join Council's Travel Directive Appendices. 0.555cent/km is the rate for travel originating in Ontario.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

Just adding to what Lumber stated.

Effective July 1, 2017

The rates payable in cents per kilometre for the use of privately owned vehicles driven on authorized government business travel are shown below:

Province/Territory                  Cents/km(taxes included)
Alberta                                  45.5
British Columbia                    50.5
Manitoba                              47.5
New Brunswick                      50.5
Newfoundland and Labrador  55.5
Northwest Territories            59.5
Nova Scotia                          50.0
Nunavut                              58.5
Ontario                                55.5
Prince Edward Island            49.0
Quebec                              50.5
Saskatchewan                    46.5
Yukon                                61.0

Note:

The kilometric rate payable when a Canadian registered vehicle is driven on government business travel in more than one province or in the USA shall be the rate applicable to the province or territory of registration of the vehicle.

 

[captloadie]

<I hope pusser doens't beat me to this....>

Your OR is wrong in someways, and right in others. There is a cap on PMV travel, in some cases, but the cap is kilometric distance, not a dollar value. I'll elaborate.

First, the CAF can't order you to drive your own vehicle; there are two way you can end up taking your own vehcile:

1. The CAF can request that you take your vehicle;
2. The CAF picks a different method of travel (train, plane, bus, etc), but YOU, the member, request to take your own vehicle instead.

In case #1, there is no cap at all. If the CO of your unit, who is the one who has ultimate authority to select the method of travel, decides that it is in the best interests of the CAF for your to take your vehicle, than he can request that you take your own vehicle. If you agree, then PMV becomes the "approved method of travel", and you will be reimbursed for the full cost of the travel. If it's a 1542km drive from Kingston to Halifax, for example, you will get 1542 kms x 0.555 cents/km (the Ontario kilometric rate) = $855.81.

In case #2, there is a cap. If the CO of your unit decides that it is in the best interests of the CAF for you to fly, you can request to take your PMV instead. This request does not have to be approved, but if the CO approves it and allows you to take your PMV, then you will on be reimbursed for the 1st day of travel. Since CAF members are not supposed to drive more than 500km in a single day, then the most you will be reimbursed for is 500km x 0.555 cents/km = $277.5

*Note 1: This exampl is just one way travel. The same applies for return travel. In case #2, the total would be $555 (500km each way x 0.555cents/km)
**Note 2: Every province has a different "kilometric rate" which can be found in the National Join Council's Travel Directive Appendices. 0.555cent/km is the rate for travel originating in Ontario.

One correction to scenario #2: the member would be reimbursed up to the cost comparison equivalent for the most economical means. If the most economical means is less then the kilometric rate, then that is what the member is reimbursed. For example, 4 individuals from Kingston are going on a 2 week course to Borden, and the CO authorizes a staff car or rental, but individual #3 wants to take his own vehicle so he can go home on the weekend, he would get only the meals for his travel day, and no kilometric rate because the most economical means is $0.

 

[donaldk]

Something that flew CAF wide amongst Snr HRAs today that I got my hands on:

TL;DR = essentially weekend travel proceeding to CL B employment as a Class A reservist is on your own accord and dime.  If you are a Class A reservist and are filling a CFTPO or other Class B/C opportunity and expected by your CoC to do weekend travel via POMV to get to it - you must make your objections known, *individually*, via email/memo/letter to your CO, to bring awareness to this issue.  The email thread below is true however the exact orgs were blanked out.  The only hope is TBS will eventually change their policy allowing DCBA to update CBI 209 down the road.  Morale of the story: if you take your POMV and not getting a cost move you are loosing out.

*** BELOW INTERPRETATION EFFECTIVE 1 AUG 17 ***

QUESTION 1 BY CO of major L3 to L2 Comptroller (J8):

1.      Good morning (L2 Comptroller/J8), as per our discussion, I would ask that you seek further input from DCBA wrt to their change in interpretation of the Weekend Travel Benefit (WTB) for Class A personnel.  This ruling will have a very significant effect on our ability to get future Class A Reserve support for incremental taskings for instructors, QS TP boards members and Administrative Investigations.

2.      CFTPO tasks are an integral part of [my organization's] course incremental staffing plan.  These tasks are sometimes filled by Class A Reservist on Class B CFTPO task.  I do not understand the differentiation of a Class A member coming on a Class B tasking that involves an extended period of time TD as compared to a Reg Force member or a full time Class B Reservist coming on tasking.  All three types of military members should be given the same benefits will on TD completing a CFTPO tasking.  The reimbursement is a recognition of a member being away from their family and should be no different for a Class A member while on Class B tasking.  Furthermore, Class A personnel lose their entitlement to their commuting assistance benefit when accepting a Class B tasking, which implies they are now considered Class B for the duration of the Class B employment and should be afforded the same TD benefits. The Class A member is often helping fill a Reg force manning shortfall and not allowing them the same benefits could jeopardize the support we have had, and hope to continue to have, from the Class A Reserve community.

3.      My unit has carried out two Board of Inquiries over the past 7 months, relying heavily upon Class A members accepting Class B tasks for up to six months at a time to fill Board positions that went unfilled by Reg Force CFTPO taskings.  These members were on TD and not within daily commuting distance of their home units or families.  Not providing the WDT benefit could jeopardize our ability to tap into this group  to fill these critical functions.


4.      The implementation of the revised interpretation below could have a devastating effect on [my organization's] future ability to fill CFTPO tasks in support of Training Establishments' courses and Administrative Investigations.  Request further consideration be given prior overturning a previous interpretation,  and if this new direction is up help, I would request a detailed explanation as to why there has been such a significant change in policy interpretation.



QUESTION 2 by L2 Comptroller/J8:




Just to clarify if a Class A member takes a Class B contract (outside their geo area) to instruct or to do a BOI, would they be entitled to “Reimbursement of weekend travel while on TD”?

I believe they should be entitled because they are performing tasks outside of their normal duties.



It is extremely hard to fill these tasking and by not providing this benefit could definitely threaten our ability to use Reserve personnel to fill these positions [and our ability to fill a CAF wide training mandate impacting the CAF as a whole].



ANSWER by +DCBA 3 Clarifcations to L2 Comptroller/J8:



Ref:  CBI 209.31



Sorry for the delay.  This policy has been under much scrutiny and we also requested Legal advice.  DCBA 3 understands the dissatisfaction and the disparity of benefits and fully recognizes the need for change. 



However, we cannot change our interpretation of the current policy.



To answer your question below:



If a Class A member takes a Class B contract (outside their geo area) and he/she is performing tasks outside of his/her normal duties (incremental tasking), he/she is not eligible to reimbursement for weekend travel based on the limitations at para 2 (c) (iii) of ref, as he/she is not already on a Class B contract and called out for an extended period of time for another purpose.



If a Class A member takes a Class B contract (outside their geo area) and he/she is performing tasks that are part of his/her normal duties(it is not an incremental tasking, like a CO when visiting units under his control, Audit WO when traveling to conduct audits etc), he/she may be reimbursed IAW para 1 of ref.



To breakdown the two entitlements in order to further assist you to remain in compliance with the Treasury Board approved policy:



1.      Reimbursement when performing tasks outside of normal duties (Para 2)

·        Who

o  Restrictive to members on full-time service

o  Regular Force, the Reserve Force on Class “C” Reserve Service or a member of the Reserve Force on Class “B” Reserve Service who, while on callout, is required to remain on callout and to perform tasks that are outside of their normal duties.  (2 (c) (iii))

§  To be clear - this only includes Reserve Force members who are on a Class B contract and then get “called out” for another purpose (incrementally) thus performing tasks outside of normal duties.  Reserve Force members (Class A) who fill incremental taskings and proceed on Class B service are not eligible under para 2

·        What

o  Reimbursement to travel on a weekend when performing tasks outside of normal duties (incremental tasks)

·        When

o  If authorized by the Commanding Officer to travel on a weekend, once every 30 days providing before beginning the travel the member has served at least eight days of actual duty at the temporary duty location and after completion of the travel there are at least eight days of actual duty remaining at the temporary duty location

·        Where

o  To the member’s normal place of duty or the place where their dependents are residing

·        How much

o  IAW CFTDTI



2.      Reimbursement when performing tasks that are part of their normal duties (Para 1)

·        Who

o  All members

·        What

o  Reimbursement to travel on a weekend when on temporary duty and performing tasks that are part of their normal duties (situations outside of incremental tasking billets) providing the member is not attending a course of training or instruction

·        When

o  Any time the member is authorized by their Commanding Officer to travel on a weekend and unless after completion of the travel, there are fewer than three days of actual duty remaining at the temporary duty location

·        Where

o  To the member’s normal place of duty or the place where their dependents are residing

·        How much

o  Shall not exceed the cost of maintaining the member at the temporary duty location



The policy in question is quite old and steps to modernize such old policies, for submission to Treasury Board, has begun; CBI 209 will be reviewed as soon as possible.  Unfortunately, a Treasury Board submission and its approval is not a fast process; policies are prioritized by the CoCs and even the GoC, and it can involve negotiations, policy comparisons, costing, and various levels of reviews (including legal).

*** ABOVE INTERPRETATION EFFECTIVE 1 AUG 17 ***

 

[kratz]

Be careful jumping the gun on this one.

Someone, has merged two concepts in their interpretation of the written Instructions:

CFTDI  - applies to all authorized TD travel, to and from your home.  For most government work (civilians, RegF, PRes ect...) So Class A reservist continue to be able be eligible to take their PMV on a TD tasking, including travel over on a Sat/Sun IAW CFTDI.


CBI 209.31 - restricts WTB to RegF and limited Cl B Personal. This is a different and separate benefit from actually transporting a member to/from a TD site.

So no substantial changes from what had been occurring for years.

 

[CountDC]

and wrong.

Class A members are not eligible to take their PMV on TD if the travel is over the daily travel limit of 500kms as heavily discussed in another thread unless:

1. The employment period is long enough for them to earn leave to cover the additional travel days; and
2. The employing unit agrees to the mbr taking leave at the beginning and end of their employment to cover the additional travel days.

not even getting into the paid leave discussion again.  Feel free to look up the other thread if you want to get into all those details/arguments.

 

[ballz]

and wrong.

Class A members are not eligible to take their PMV on TD if the travel is over the daily travel limit of 500kms as heavily discussed in another thread unless:

1. The employment period is long enough for them to earn leave to cover the additional travel days; and
2. The employing unit agrees to the mbr taking leave at the beginning and end of their employment to cover the additional travel days.

not even getting into the paid leave discussion again.  Feel free to look up the other thread if you want to get into all those details/arguments.

I sincerely hope the BS around POMVs (it's more than just the Class A stuff that's ridiculous on this issue) is near the top of this list of concerns being brought to the TB... but somehow I doubt it.

 

[captloadie]

/tangent
I'm curious on which specific BS on POMVs you would like changed? I agree that the Class A issue is a great dissatifier.

The rules on Reg F/Class B members though has a specific reason. And it isn't a financial one (other than most cost effective means). It is about a member's safety, and treating members like adults. The CoC, by allowing a member to take their own vehicle, is accommodating a personal desire of the member. By forcing the member to be on some type of leave over and above the allotted travel day is the CoC doing its due diligence to ensure the member can take adequate time to get to their destination. We aren't babying people here, we are actually providing the member an opportunity to act like an adult. I won't dictate to a member he needs to take all 4 days to get to his course location for example. I'm giving them the flexibility of making an adult decision on what they can personally do the drive in, arriving safely and ready for course. I agree that it should matter what type of leave the member is on, as long as it is valid for that purpose.

/tangent

 

[Eye In The Sky]

With a 500km/day enforced limit?  That's being treated 'like an adult'?  I disagree. 

If I'm Cl A and starting a CL B on Base X, 800kms away on a Sunday which is also my travel day, how exactly can the CAF tell me where I can and can't drive my car on Fri and Sat?  Or, is this specifically WRT paid duty travel vice "what I do when I am not on the Queens Time"?

 

[CountDC]

ok I will play on that one.

They are not telling you what you can do, they are telling you what the military/government will cover you for.  If you decide to drive without authority then the military does not pay for your travel, you are on your own dime.  More importantly though is that if you have an accident while traveling on your own then you are not covered by the military or VAC.  If you are Reg F and get into an accident outside the one day travel/500kms then VAC may not cover you. Liability and benefits plays a part in this.  Claims are always done up to reflect the authorized form of travel which is usually CA.

I always inform people, I am not saying you can't, I am providing the information for you to make an educated decision knowing what will be claimable and the possible risks involved.  Like an adult you then decide what you are willing to give up and if the risk is worth it.

 

[Lumber]

There is a very easy solution for all Class-A members who want to drive their own vehicles to courses/taskings etc. It's dishonest, technically, but it works and you still get to keep your travel day as a paid travel day. Just figure it out and you're golden.

As for RegF/Class-B, I agree with both EITS and captloadie.

The rules are therefore your safety. If the tasking is 1500km away, and you have to be there tomorrow, then yes, techncailly you can drive there in 12hrs going 120kph the whole way, but is it safe?

Now, 500km a day? That's too little. How about 800km a day.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

ok I will play on that one.

They are not telling you what you can do, they are telling you what the military/government will cover you for.  If you decide to drive without authority then the military does not pay for your travel, you are on your own dime.  More importantly though is that if you have an accident while traveling on your own then you are not covered by the military or VAC.  If you are Reg F and get into an accident outside the one day travel/500kms then VAC may not cover you. Liability and benefits plays a part in this.  Claims are always done up to reflect the authorized form of travel which is usually CA.

I always inform people, I am not saying you can't, I am providing the information for you to make an educated decision knowing what will be claimable and the possible risks involved.  Like an adult you then decide what you are willing to give up and if the risk is worth it.

Really good points to draw attention to.  I know if it were me, and I was going 1000km away on a Cl B for 2-3 months, I'd take my car.  I recall my Cl B callout days with no vehicle...not fun.  Of course, yes, then the mbr is effectively "a civie" travelling back and forth.  I've seen compromise too.  I've also see some units say "you can't use your Special Leave days to travel".  And others have no problem with it as it is 'paid leave'.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

The rules are therefore your safety. If the tasking is 1500km away, and you have to be there tomorrow, then yes, techncailly you can drive there in 12hrs going 120kph the whole way, but is it safe?

Now, 500km a day? That's too little. How about 800km a day.

800 sounds more adult-realistic to me and, IIRC, is about the amount professional trucker drivers are limited to a day. 

If I was posted from coast to coast, I'd have X days to travel.  No one AFAIK actually checks my file to ensure "I only drove 500km/day". 

 

[kratz]

800 sounds more adult-realistic to me and, IIRC, is about the amount professional trucker drivers are limited to a day. 

If I was posted from coast to coast, I'd have X days to travel.  No one AFAIK actually checks my file to ensure "I only drove 500km/day".

Not only safety, but some of these travel policies align with what the public service unions have negotiated.
While a private sector trucker may be limited to 800Km per day, how do the TB agreements bear on our current restrictions?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

No idea, but if that is part or the majority of the reason we became restricted 500 a day....well, I think the GoC needs to evaluate if the CAF and the public servants need to have the exact same parameters;  I think we do not.  We have different needs for different reasons (IMO).

Of course, reality and common sense doesn't have to play a part in the equation.  :tsktsk:

 

[ballz]

/tangent
I'm curious on which specific BS on POMVs you would like changed? I agree that the Class A issue is a great dissatifier.

The rules on Reg F/Class B members though has a specific reason. And it isn't a financial one (other than most cost effective means). It is about a member's safety, and treating members like adults. The CoC, by allowing a member to take their own vehicle, is accommodating a personal desire of the member. By forcing the member to be on some type of leave over and above the allotted travel day is the CoC doing its due diligence to ensure the member can take adequate time to get to their destination. We aren't babying people here, we are actually providing the member an opportunity to act like an adult. I won't dictate to a member he needs to take all 4 days to get to his course location for example. I'm giving them the flexibility of making an adult decision on what they can personally do the drive in, arriving safely and ready for course. I agree that it should matter what type of leave the member is on, as long as it is valid for that purpose.

/tangent

I've driven across Canada three times. The first two times, I drove 16 hours a day. The third time, I drove about 10. Good to know I'm not adult enough. You are certainly the first human I've come across that thinks telling a grown man/woman how many hours he can drive in a day - particularly limiting it to five hours (but I don't care if you're telling him he can't drive for 16 hours, the point stands) - is "treating people like an adult" and "not babysitting" them.

If I'm on annual leave, or weekend leave for that matter, and I want to drive in circles on the Anthony Henday for 20 hrs, that's none of DND's  business. If I'm on annual leave, or weekend leave, and want to drive to from Edmonton to Borden, that's none of DND's business. So this policy is particularly awful because it's very clear that you are on leave and therefore it's not duty-travel / injuries and are not service-related but yet you must take enough leave to do so as if you were 1. being paid to do this and 2. covered in the event of injury. That is literally trying to suck and blow at the same time. Either I'm on leave and it's none of DND's business, or I'm not on leave and you can tell me I can only drive 500km. Not both.

This policy is literally a punitive measure applied to those who are being sent on TD for often times months at a time. Not only that, but then they literally save money on the backs of the member who is getting screwed by reimbursing him *less* than if he flew.

Find me any other job that asks their employee to go to some craphole in nowhereville for 3 months and tells them "if you want to take your car at your own expense, I will reimburse you less money and by the way, forfeit some of your leave for helping me out." and then go to the recruiting/retention thread and think about it for a bit. Most of our compensation & benefits is based off of public service... in the public service they literally ask the employee "do you want to fly or drive" and then when they say "drive," they get reimbursed the high-rate, the hotels, etc etc etc.

The policy should be re-written to something that does treat members like adults, such as "if member elects to drive, they will be provided one duty travel day and reimbursed the cost of the Commanding Officer's selected mode of transportation. The member will be required to make all other arrangements necessary, including use of annual leave if required."

800 sounds more adult-realistic to me and, IIRC, is about the amount professional trucker drivers are limited to a day. 

My cousin is a trucker and told me he is limited to 13 hours a day behind the wheel. I don't know how much that varies across provinces or if it does at all.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Just as comparisons...  On the Hornet, you can have a crew duty day of 14 hours and CO can extend to 16 hours.  Furthermore, I can fly an 8-hour combat mission (and I have on 3 occasions) and up to 10 hours a day for transits.

Yet, I can't drive for more than 5 hours on a highway?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Yup; we are 18 hour crew day max at the crew commander level, CO can authorize a 24 hour crew day.  We fly straight across the ocean from this continent to "others" non-stop and that is no issue.  I've been on crews that have done 12+hour missions.

Drive more than 5 hours straight?  Unpossible!  Unsafe!  rly:

 

[Eagle_Eye_View]

Sadly the people who makes these policies can’t think outside the box, nor think about operational reasons. Making policies that follow “common sense” or “in the best interest” of the member is not part of their mandate.

Rant off

 

[captloadie]

Ballz - I'm still not really sure what point you are trying to make. What does it matter if you drove straight across Canada in so many hours so many times. Good for you. You made an adult decision on what you could do safely. Congratulations. And it doesn't matter what they do on civvy street, other than for individuals like you who continue to put forward the argument that its so much better than the CAF.

The crew day scenario for flying, much like comparing what professional drivers are allowed to do, isn't valid as a straight across comparison. Max and EITS, after those 12 or 16 hour days, how many times have you had to get up and do it all again the next day for more than 2 days straight? I know the crew day rules as well, and unless there is an operational imperative, know there are mandatory rest periods R days. It isn't supposed to happen that you fly two straight 12-14 hour crew days, and then be in class the next morning at 0800 wide awake and ready to learn (yes, it probably has happened, but it isn't the norm).

Professional drivers, especially long haul drivers, do it for a living. Their bodies have adjusted to the job, and they are mentally and physically adapted to long days behind the wheel. Even then though, they suffer from fatigue, and if you Google it, there aren't many days go by that some semi hasn't been in an accident due to fatigue. They also aren't making money unless they are on the road. Capt Dumas or Cpl Bloggins who sits behind a desk or works on the shop floor for 8 hours a day and then heads home can't be expected to be able to pull 2 or 3 long days behind the wheel and then show up for class ready to go. But if they choose to, well that's a personal choice.

Is the limit of 500km too little? Probably. But what should the limit be? And do we need to be careful that we aren't shooting ourselves in the foot, because all of a sudden the Move entitlements change? How long before someone says that if you can drive 800km for non move related travel, you can do the same when moving (although I can travel a lot farther in a day without a wife, 3 kids the dog and a everything else I'm dragging along).