Res Force Pay

[Eye In The Sky]

Geo,

All the Class B (A) folks in LFAA sign an actual contract, which states length of employment, rank, position, etc.  It also has the para in it about understanding that you can be tasked on TD, within Canada, as required.  It also states you are required to give 30 days notice to terminate the Cl B, and that the employing unit must also give you 30 day notice if they end your Cl B before the end date (I've seen that happen to a few people for poor performance).  IIRC, the contract is 4 x 8 1/2 pages printed.

The last one I signed was a 3 year contract, but we still had route letters done up and entered into IRPS and all the usual stuff that goes along with Cl B.

The reference for this is LFAAD, Part 5, Section 5.2.6, Para 20.

I am not sure how other areas do it but, the rules and reg's for Class B/B (A) in LFAA are fairly well laid out.

 

[geo]

EITS
The members signs a terms of service document.... but have you noticed that the employer doesn't.
The document asks for a witness.... which usually ends up being some "lowly" RMS clerk that delivers the good / bad news.

I agree that your LFAAD refers to a "contract"..... but in the end - it isn't much of one - it can be terminated on 30 days notice, with little or no difficulty.  A real contract would have the effect that, you've been hired for 3 years.

 

[kratz]

The reference is a Statement of Understanding (SOU) and is for local reproduction from A-PM-245 Chapter 19 Annex D.

It should be in normal use nationally for employment over 180 days. But in the rush to get the member to the gaining unit, it has been known to be missed.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

To a certain extent, I agree.  The CF retains the ability to terminate your contract in 30 days, but is that also not possible to someone RegF, where they could be released for various reasons before the end of their current TOS?  The process and timelines are different, but the rest is the same; sub standard performers, admin/discplinary burdens are dealt with etc.

Not to keep flogging this, but I believe our CL B/A contracts were witnessed by the OR Supr and then signed by the G1 or HQ CO/COS.  The only mbrs who signed multiyear contracts were those in CL B(A) slots, full time PRes positions in the ARE table.  

I am getting the idea that only LFAA considers these to be contracts with their Cl B/A mbrs. (GD Maritimers!)  :blotto:

 

[geo]

The reference is a Statement of Understanding (SOU) and is for local reproduction from A-PM-245 Chapter 19 Annex D.

It should be in normal use nationally for employment over 180 days. But in the rush to get the member to the gaining unit, it has been known to be missed.

Signed or not.... it is a statement signed by the member & a witness.... no committment by the "employer" AKA a "big guy"

 

[CountDC]

Geo,

All the Class B (A) folks in LFAA sign an actual contract, which states length of employment, rank, position, etc.  It also has the para in it about understanding that you can be tasked on TD, within Canada, as required.  It also states you are required to give 30 days notice to terminate the Cl B, and that the employing unit must also give you 30 day notice if they end your Cl B before the end date (I've seen that happen to a few people for poor performance).  IIRC, the contract is 4 x 8 1/2 pages printed.

The last one I signed was a 3 year contract, but we still had route letters done up and entered into IRPS and all the usual stuff that goes along with Cl B.

The reference for this is LFAAD, Part 5, Section 5.2.6, Para 20.

I am not sure how other areas do it but, the rules and reg's for Class B/B (A) in LFAA are fairly well laid out.

Not to be too picky but your ref does not say you sign a contract - it is saying you must sign NDHQ Instruction ADM (PER) 2/93 1 April 1993 Appx 3 to Anx B which is a statement of understanding in order to have a multi-year contract applied to a Cl B/A posn. They may even still be using the one I typed out on the computer when I was at LFAAHQ.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Well we can dance around the terms all day.   ;D

Bottom line is I signed "something" and had a Class B/A position for 3 years unless I messed up OR the CF changed the ARE.  Improperly or not, they were referred to as contracts and everyone knew their job was (as safe as a Class B can be) for another 3 years (for B/a's).  The straight CL B types had to wait at the end of each FY to see if their Posn was going to be funded again, whereas the B/a's were ARE Posn's that had to be staffed. 

So not a contract per say as when I signed my VIE, but it was as good as it gets as a CBC.

 

[geo]

EITS.... we can certainly agree to your last.....
Yes - you / I / we signed a statement of understanding & served 3 years in a position.
But = is it a contract ???  is it legaly binding ?

If you sign a contract to buy a car, take delivery of it & start to pay it off.... can you stop & return same said car to the dealer on 30 days notice ??? (nope-he'd take you to court to collect on the balance of contract)
If you sign a contract for 3 years of employment.... can they stop it on 30 days notice ??? yep! you betcha !  cause it isn't a contract.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I guess I'll have to say I agree from the legal standpoint.  As I could be released from the Reg Force for 'certain reasons' if I really messed up, I guess my VIE isn't a contract either then?

Its odd though, that the ULAs or someone doesn't point that out to them and have them change the LFAAD to state "multiyear employment" or something...because they (LFAA HQ) refer to it as a 'contract'.

 

[Neill McKay]

If you sign a contract to buy a car, take delivery of it & start to pay it off.... can you stop & return same said car to the dealer on 30 days notice ??? (nope-he'd take you to court to collect on the balance of contract)
If you sign a contract for 3 years of employment.... can they stop it on 30 days notice ??? yep! you betcha !  cause it isn't a contract.

A contract for employment, though, is likely to contain some kind of provision for getting out, by either side, e.g. a requirement for the employee to give X weeks' notice when quitting, and for the employer to give X weeks' notice when dismissing the employee.  It's still a contract, just one with terms for ending itself.

 

[geo]

Yes Neill.... but this statement of understanding that's signed by everyone doesn't have to be signed by anyone in the chain of command..... all it says is.... witness.

If the Cdn gov't decided that the CF was costing them too much in these difficult times & that they must return XX% of it's current operating budget - the CF "could" turn around, terminate a bunch of positions currently occupied by reservists AND give same said reservists 30 days notice.  In civy street,  the employer would have to pay a lot more severance

 

[Monsoon]

Yes Neill.... but this statement of understanding that's signed by everyone doesn't have to be signed by anyone in the chain of command..... all it says is.... witness.

The SOU isn't the "contract". In the case of class B, the contract can be deemed to be an oral one. Under contract law all that is required to conclude a contract is payment of "consideration" (your salary, i.e.) - it doesn't necessarily have to be signed by everyone involved. In a class B contract, you agree to be bound by all of the regulations that exist regarding class B employment - most of which you will not have read. Understanding this, some sharp fellow at the Judge Advocate's office drew up the SOU that you sign giving you the gist of what the contract is all about so that you can't claim to have been blindsided by a decision.

Maybe it isn't a very good contract (from the employee's perspective), but it's a contract nonetheless.

 

[54/102 CEF]

Let's be honest here.....

Yes - lets.

How about 15% for foregoing a civvy career for the Govt ? Now extend that to the 85% ers - same story - work for the Queen or work for the Green is the same risk in Canada ----> your civvy potential may be diminished by service in the CF so we overpay so you stay.

As for overseas pay ------> its sky rocketted since 2002/2003 being really crappy for the reg force -----> not a factor in the argument

As for we have to deploy anytime ---------> MAYBE for certain very high readieness units like Aircrew or certain others. If true - then why can't we switch a BG with less than the current level of trg? Skill fade for full time troops is a fact.

I keep coming back to the UK and US system ----- pay them full time whereever they are - based on the trg they've done and the time they have in ----- and their hearts and minds will follow. The more you do - courses and time in -- the more you get. We use this principle for overseas duty benefits.

 

[geo]

The SOU isn't the "contract". In the case of class B, the contract can be deemed to be an oral one. Under contract law all that is required to conclude a contract is payment of "consideration" (your salary, i.e.) - it doesn't necessarily have to be signed by everyone involved. In a class B contract, you agree to be bound by all of the regulations that exist regarding class B employment - most of which you will not have read. Understanding this, some sharp fellow at the Judge Advocate's office drew up the SOU that you sign giving you the gist of what the contract is all about so that you can't claim to have been blindsided by a decision.

Maybe it isn't a very good contract (from the employee's perspective), but it's a contract nonetheless.

Will have to keep this argument in mind - next time similar discussion comes up ...

 

[CountDC]

Yes - lets.

How about 15% for foregoing a civvy career for the Govt ? Now extend that to the 85% ers - same story - work for the Queen or work for the Green is the same risk in Canada ----> your civvy potential may be diminished by service in the CF so we overpay so you stay.

As for overseas pay ------> its sky rocketted since 2002/2003 being really crappy for the reg force -----> not a factor in the argument

As for we have to deploy anytime ---------> MAYBE for certain very high readieness units like Aircrew or certain others. If true - then why can't we switch a BG with less than the current level of trg? Skill fade for full time troops is a fact.

I keep coming back to the UK and US system ----- pay them full time whereever they are - based on the trg they've done and the time they have in ----- and their hearts and minds will follow. The more you do - courses and time in -- the more you get. We use this principle for overseas duty benefits.

This is an argument that has gone on forever and I am sure will continue for a long time to come.  Some other points in the mix that I have seen/heard over the years - Reg F get posted where and when the military chooses to send you - Res F choose, Res give 30 days notice - Reg have to give 6 months (reality is they can request as early as 30 days but military can say no and has on occassions),  Reg can be sent to areas such as A'tan while Res have to volunteer.  A point that came up once when talking to an  officer from NDHQ dealing with pay issues was that the feeling at that time was paying Cl B and Reg F same level would deter members from going into the Reg F - they wanted to maintain that little extra incentive. The other point often raised is that Res F is not meant to be career but a part time volunteer employment on top of their civvy job (we all know some have made it a career but that is not the military intent).

I like the idea of reserve service being Cl A, Cl B used for short period employments such as courses, MATA/PATA backfilled, summer camps.  Cl B/A and Cl C done away with for long term positions and use Reg F FPS. Of course don't see this happening, especially with how well CT's are going these days and I am sure someone would insist that FPS be treated as any other CT.