Halifax Tar said:
I mean that when someone is in real need of something and you know that need is justified then issue the required item(s). I have never once in 10 years in the CF as a Sup Tech seen anyone get in any trouble minor or major for ensuring that they provided the highest level of support.
PS A shiny piece of kit to look cool on course X is not a real need its a want something very different.
No see, the correct way to handle your situation above would be to adress the
real problem; amend the scale. You see, if 'common sense' dictates that individual "X" should have a piece of kit, but is not entitled to it ... odds are that there are more than individual "X" out there in the exact same circumstances.
You, as a Cpl/LS have ZERO authority to issue that non-entitled item regardless of the situation, but what you do have is authority to handle the situation appropriately & to advise your CSG supervisor. You provide them with the details of such so that the CSG supr can then advise the SM (in writing) of ALL the pertinent facts and particulars & obtain written authorization back from the SM to "issue outside of entitlement" - a hard copy of which (the email auth from NDHQ) is placed into the member "x"s clothing docs for auditing purposes. That written auth also covers your butt when the auditors go through and begin firing questions at you as to why you are issuing nonauthorized items (I HAVE seen those auditors' invests happen too, more than once). This authority can be obtained in a matter of minutes. I've done it, and it was common for my staff to provide this customers reporting to our front counter looking for nonentitled items that "made sense". One quick call to the SM to explain the sit, and an email authorizing the issue 2 minutes later.
I then took the email and forwarded to the scale OPI along with all the relevant facts & details. The scale OPI then consults with applicable trade and/or environmental contacts to effect a change to the scale of entitlement so that there are no more "member Xs" out there in the exact same sit who experience the exact same problem each and every time they visit clothing. You FIX the problem, you don't simply ignore it's existance while accomodating "member X" by (illegally) issuing outside of entitlement & allowing all the others' to go through the same heartache at clothing stores' accross the country because the scale still does not reflect "common sense".
In the case of the engineers not being entitled to safety footwear, the problem (along with "common sense" substantiation) was written up by me, by the RSM of CFSME, and by the Base Gen Safety O and all three of our reports were filed simultaneously with the scale OPI - who then did his appropriate consultations & the scale of entitlement was then amended within the week to show their entitlement to safety footwear. Thing is, when it was changed, there was still no entitlement for Engineering Officers to the safety footwear - so that issue itself was then re-addressed by us and their entitlement followed the next week.
When the new SOGs came CIS, entitlement was by Unit (by UIC); thing was, there was no entitlement for 4ESR to be issued the SOG despite them being an Engineer Unit and despite the SOG being intended as an Engineer knife. We noticed this problem while reviewing the PIP when we received it. The (then) RQ and I both drafted our substantiation to the project team immediately via email that very day ... and the scale was amended by 1600hrs that very same day. Therefore, not one individual "X" had a problem obtaining this item when we recd it into stock for initial issues and they will not have any future problems obtaining it either. And there certainly would have been problems had we not done our jobs and had the scale changed as we wouldn't have recd anywhere near the qtys required to issue to pers who required this item to do their jobs. Never again will engineers have problems obtaining their safety boots either (no matter who or where they are served at whatever front counter of clothing stores) because the problem itself was corrected ... not shuffeled off under the carpet as non-existant by ignoring "common sense" in that there are "others out there". And, the best part of it all, my troops' butts are covered!! They acted legally. The item was issued "with authorization" and they won't have to answer to anything/anyone should their issuing of a non-entitled item come to light. All because they took the extra 2 minutes to do something the proper way. The process exists for a reason and it does work.
As for you verifying the scale when you get back, have fun with that. It's been a month since (as stated how many times already in this thread) that the conflict between the scale of entitlement and the message was adressed - so hopefully it DOES read the way you wish it to now.
Oh yeah, I am well aware that Comm Rsch is a purple trade. I have enough TI & experience to fully grasp that despite what you may believe. The point of my statement (go ahead and read it again) was that what purple trades were entitled to, and in which posn, on an old scale and having been entitled to the old NCDs in '99 while in non-naval posns" has absolutely SFA to do with "purple trades and their end-Nov '09 entitlement to new NCDs in non-Navy posns". What an old scale on an old item of kit read in '99 does NOT mean that current scales of current dress items read same ... as a Sup tech, I'd think you'd have enough TI & experience to be able to grasp that yourself - apparently not.
You have a Happy New Year too.
