Troops Forced To Pay Back Meal Claims Advances

[Grunt_031]

If the mbrs had failed or been RTU in the first weeks of the course they would have had to pay back the advance. If they spent the money before they left on course, it is a gamble they chose and they lost. The advance is to pay for expenses and is not to supplement their income (common thinking within the CF). If at the end of the course there is extra money, all the better for them but it is not theirs until the last day of the course (in the old days you had to provide receipts and proof of all expenses). If they had used the goverment travel amex card (available to all reg CF pers) there is no requirement for advances. All mbrs should be famil with their pay and allowances. Of course, there was a breakdown in the chain of command somewhere and there should be ever effort made to assit the mbrs with repayment but they are still reponsible for the crowns money.

 

[Armymedic]

Xfusilier

What ever happened to you, Bloggins, pack your kit you‘re going on course.

The senior official in this story is correct, the military is not a smorgasbord of benefits. The military way of doing business is not to attempt to buy volunteers it is to order people to go if no one is willing to volunteer, not tell some one that you are going to break the law (yes, TD rates are regulations, and therefore legal documents) for them.

TD rates are well known and published, and the fact that they chose to ignore the obvious, places a fair amount of responsibility for this on them.

YOU ARE RIGHT OUT OF ‘ER!
Not to mention a heartless blade.

Why would anyone in the regular military volunteer to undertake a course for the military, to benifit the military in its operations, knowing that they will have to take money away from thier families so that they can eat while undergoing training without the proper reinbursement? Were meals provided by the company? Was there accm and messing immediately avail. I am pretty sure there is not. And another thing..Its not like they were just a block from home, you can pretty much guarentee 9 of those 10 students travelled from outside BC.
As a medic I have been tasked, undergone and taught civilian based courses where the per deim actually allows me to go away for the week to 2 months I am gone without worrying about how much money I am taking out of my family budget. It is not a "benefit" it is an entitlement because thats what it costs to be living away from your own home for long periods of time. The fact your hotel room has a kitchenette has no effect on your entitlement.
The amounts are well stated by others above. The per diem that was removed was for meals....what, am I to take my families grocery money away so I do the army‘s bidding?

Not Bloody likely. And try to tell me I do.
This is not the same as "take that trench"

 

[Garry]

I was in Vancouver, on a parallel course at the same facility, stayed in the same hotel, and discussed the problem from the outset with the guys who are "in the news". Subsequent to the course, I discussed this with one of the affected folk. (We serve together)

The whole affair was muddled by the release of new treasury board guidelines that came out just prior to, or during (can‘t remember) the course. Basically, it allowed a higher food allowance for the first 30 days of trg, and then dropped substantially for any days after 30 days. It was aimed at those who stayed in facilities with kitchenettes.

These folk were told (in writing, on course message) where they were staying, and how many $$ per day they were entitled to for food and incidentals. A little over halfway through the course, they were warned that the food entitlement "may change", so be careful. This was a verbal warning.

The system screwed up on this one. Lots more inuendo and rumours, but I‘m not passing those around. Suffice it to say, the troops weren‘t the only ones outraged, but no resolution to the problem was found.

On the good side, the Ombudsmen did his job. The system is NOT perfect, but will sort this out. Hopefully, we (The Forces) will learn from this, ans it won‘t happen again.

Small comfort for those afected though.

Cheers-Garry

 

[xFusilier]

Im sorry, call me a heartless blade if you will (I got broad shoulders) but;

TD allowances exist to ensure that an employee of the Government of Canada does not go out of pocket on expenses. No wheare have I stated in this forum that members of the CF should go out of pocket for travel expenses. TD is also not a program which is designed to allow people to profit as a result of travel on Crown business, nor is TD designed to be used as an addition incentive when seeking volunteers.

Call me heartless I look at this situation as being no different that being overpaid, knowing you‘ve been overpaid, spending the money and then complaining when you‘ve been asked to pay it back.