RANK and IPC on CFR

[Ex-Dragoon]

Geeez..

I am dancing around the right answer and I just can't pinpoint it.

So I ask for help... and all of a sudden I am not a good leader?

Some of you should brush up on your 12 principles of leadership. And yes... there are 12 now.. not 10.

My bosses nor my subordinates have any issues with how I do things. The owner of this site is happy with my performance as a mod so I am doing fine thanks.

 

[armyvern]

STUDY them...

really hard!

Suggest you do that yourself. 

Making special note of numbers 1, 3, 4 (direct), 5, 10 (seek information - this can be done by yourself via the "search" button as explained), and 11 (learn from experience would insinuate that you GAIN the experience). I've already explained #8 to you in an earlier post.

This is what a Leader does.

YOU are asking about CFRing (being a Leader in the Officer Corps), thus insinuating that you ALREADY have the Leadership skills required to pull off being able to comply with and fulfill these 12 Principles of Leadership.

Correct? Or am I missing something in that 2nd principle listed?

 

[timstec]

YES Ma'am! I'm right on it! 

 

[Shamrock]

If memory serves, when I changed status, the formula was something like:

1.  Determine your present pay class.  That should be the lowest salary that meets your current pay without reducing it.
2.  Take the difference between IPC 0 and IPC 1 of your present rank.
3.  Add that value to your present IPC.  This is your entitlement to pay increase upon promotion.
4.  Use the CBI's to find where your pay scale and table are upon promotion.
5.  Find where that least amount on the appropriate scale and table that satisfies that value.  This conceivably means a $1 (or no) pay raise.


A ficticious example:
MCpl Bloggins has applied for and been accepted into the UTPNCM program.  Presently, he's getting MCpl 3 for a total of $4300 a month.  MCpl 0 is $4100 a month and MCpl 1 is $4225 - a total of $125 a month difference.  So, MCpl Bloggins is entitled to $4325 upon promotion to OCdt.

He refers to the proper tables.  OCdt 7 makes $4100 a month.  OCdt 8 Makes $4210 a month.  OCdt 9 makes $4336 a month.  Since his entitlement is only $4325, MCpl Bloggins gets OCdt 8, for a grand total of a $10 pay raise.


Rules have changed since I switched, and I may be recalling them incorrectly.  Although I am now an officer, I did not CFR, so there may be a different formula for those undergoing that comissioning plan.  For those wondering, there is a marked difference between CFR and other comissioning plans, including what is required to be accepted into them and the ability to function once comissioned.  CFR is not a comission sought, it is a comission offered for outstanding leadership, both at the individual and institutional level.

Which is where the umbrage is taken at the original post.

 

[timstec]

Thank you Shamrock.

Your post helps me out quite a bit.

thanks again

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Haven't you heard, CFAO's are being phased in favour of DAOD's and new FAM's? They have not conducted proper CFAO amendments for years, some even over 20 years so doubt very much they would amend this either. Just wait for direction that CDA should be releasing once all the T's are crossed.

And by the way, no it does not need to say it implicitly say it supersedes CFAO's. Ideally it would, however looking at endless changes in policy over the last 20 years it is unfortunately a rarity, rather direction issued by Managing Authorities of the subject matter has become current policy (take the DCBA Aide-Memoire for example).

Ok...then why are the CFAOs still online and not amended as superceded?  Makes it hard for some folks to be able to look at the books and find the right info.

If this is the way the CF is doing enterprise level admin, someone up top should be getting a kick in the nuts.

 

[Shamrock]

No worries.  You may want to read the CBI I directed you to and confirm the math remains the same and confirm for others reading.

 

[timstec]

thanks I will

 

[armyvern]

If memory serves, when I changed status, the formula was something like:

1.  Determine your present pay class.  That should be the lowest salary that meets your current pay without reducing it.
2.  Take the difference between IPC 0 and IPC 1 of your present rank.
3.  Add that value to your present IPC.  This is your entitlement to pay increase upon promotion.
4.  Use the CBI's to find where your pay scale and table are upon promotion.
5.  Find where that least amount on the appropriate scale and table that satisfies that value.  This conceivably means a $1 (or no) pay raise.


A ficticious example:
MCpl Bloggins has applied for and been accepted into the UTPNCM program.  Presently, he's getting MCpl 3 for a total of $4300 a month.  MCpl 0 is $4100 a month and MCpl 1 is $4225 - a total of $125 a month difference.  So, MCpl Bloggins is entitled to $4325 upon promotion to OCdt.

He refers to the proper tables.  OCdt 7 makes $4100 a month.  OCdt 8 Makes $4210 a month.  OCdt 9 makes $4336 a month.  Since his entitlement is only $4325, MCpl Bloggins gets OCdt 8, for a grand total of a $10 pay raise.

You're correct with your 1 through 5 (as was given to him officially at post number 7's response here )

But, if I were OCdt Bloggins (in your example above) -- I'd be coming back to haunt you about your reference and forumla. $4300 at my MCpl Bloggins pay-rate PLUS the $125 difference between IPC 0 and 1 of that pay scale = an entitlement to at least $4425 as an Officer Cadet (vice $4325 that you gave). That'd have me bumped up a pay scale and cursing RMS clerks who figured it out wrong and put me at your listed OCdt 8 IPC. You giving me interest on my back pay when I finally figure out that you were paying me at the wrong OCdt 8 rate?  >

I already know the answer ... no you're not. Ensuring we are paid the proper rate each month is a personal responsibilty vice a responsibilty of the RMS clerk.

 

[Shamrock]

That Bloggins guy is an idiot anyway.

 

[armyvern]

That Bloggins guy is an idiot anyway.

Well, he's prolific to say the least!! 

 

[Blackadder1916]

Refusing someone's CFR because he/she could not find a reference.

You obviously have not heard of something we call... leadership!  ???

Technically it wouldn't be "refusing someone's CFR" since in many cases if the individual is not judged worthy for consideration they will never know, as CFR is not an application program.  Nominations for CFR rest solely with a CO, though many of the suggestions for nomination originate at a lower level, and sometimes the initial idea may come from the nominees themselves when they mention it to their CoC.

And yes I have heard of leadership...once or twice.  Plus, I have nominated/recommended pers in the past for commissioning as well as told individuals that I did not judge them suitable for CFR when they asked if I would nominate them.  CFR was once very common as an officer production program in my (before I retired) MOC, HCA.  At one time, over 90% of the officers in tha occupation had prior service in the ranks (reg force).

 

[PO2FinClk]

Ok...then why are the CFAOs still online and not amended as superceded?  Makes it hard for some folks to be able to look at the books and find the right info.

If this is the way the CF is doing enterprise level admin, someone up top should be getting a kick in the nuts.

I cannot agree more, and pretty much any clerk out there would have to agree with you. The entire idea of phasing out CFAO's for DAOD's was announced over 10 years ago and yet here we are now. The volume of reference material on a myriad of subjects makes it difficult to find, if its even made available online through the DIN at all.

The Pay & IPC issue, CBI's however are in fact very clear on the issue, not hard to find and/or interpret in the slightest. And as stated in my previous post, there are several threads in these forums which elaborate on them even further. USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION!. I will not simply use my personal time to assist someone looking for a very simple handout.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Agreed FinClk...some people would prefer you do all the work for them and if you don't they get all snitty.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Agreed FinClk...some people would prefer you do all the work for them and if you don't they get all snitty.

Are you referring to me?

 

[armyvern]

Are you referring to me?

Seems to me that it is more appropriately being addressed towards the poster of this ... (the original poster - just look what happened when we provided him refs and told him how to go about getting his answer ...)

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/78967/post-744877.html#msg744877

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Seems to me that it is more appropriately being addressed towards the poster of this ... (the original poster - just look what happened when we provided him refs and told him how to go about getting his answer ...)

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/78967/post-744877.html#msg744877

Seen. 

Sometimes its frustrating to find what you think is the Ref, only to find that is superceded and its not indicated at the old Ref, with no link to the new Ref...ah well, keeps me busy!