Travel on weekend leave

[Occam]

No, you're assuming that the OP is from Petawawa.  You're telling me that you've read the Standing Orders for every single unit in Pet?  Bored much?

Stop creating regulations where none may exist.

 

[PuckChaser]

No, you're assuming that the OP is from Petawawa.  You're telling me that you've read the Standing Orders for every single unit in Pet?  Bored much?

Stop creating regulations where none may exist.

And yet they plausibly very well may exist. The weekend leave pass outside a certain area is not a ridiculous request, and common in many units. The leave manual says a CO can grant up to 14 days compassionate, yet with one CO I got those 14, and another created a USO stating for the same reason I could only get 4.

Is a weekend leave pass and a 5B really someone's hill to die on? Is ordering someone to provide a weekend leave pass when leaving a certain area an unlawful command? Both answers should be no.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

How about we all reel our penises in and wait to see if the OP has some more answers Monday night for us?
Thanks,
Bruce
army.ca staff

 

[ballz]

I'd tend to agree with you about what the real issue is here...but again, it goes back to the fact that the Sgt granted the extra day.  The whole "under the table leave form just for emergencies" was meant for exactly this type of situation (rightly or wrongly, as kratz has mentioned).  If you're going to grant the day of leave to deal with the situation, don't beat the member over the head with the form. 

If I read correctly, the Sgt granted him the Monday and other than irritating his Sgt, I assume nothing was going to be done about it ("Sgt is mad but what is he going to do."). Then the member couldn't get his car fixed that Monday and requested to have the Tuesday off as well, which is probably what caused the problem. Then he made it the unit's problem by having someone from the unit come pick him up at the bus stop, etc.

So, they did not grant the leave day and then beat the member over it, they granted him one and then beat him over the head when he asked for another and asked for the unit to pick him up at the bus stop.

So now this is 4-5 ish at night, im stranded with my wife around 5 hours drive away.  I phone my Sgt informing him of the situation, I want to phone in an annual leave pass because their is always a blank one on file signed with blank date.

Sgt is mad but what is he going to do.

Car is not ready the next day. Chain of command will not entertain another annual. so I hop in a bus, phone chain of command and ask if there is anyone able to pick me up a hour before work starts because that's when its going to arrive. Get to work on time, show receipts. Wife drives home next day when car is ready. I think problem is gone.

A few later receive evaluation about how shitty my admin is...

 

[Occam]

If I read correctly, the Sgt granted him the Monday and other than irritating his Sgt, I assume nothing was going to be done about it ("Sgt is mad but what is he going to do."). Then the member couldn't get his car fixed that Monday and requested to have the Tuesday off as well, which is probably what caused the problem. Then he made it the unit's problem by having someone from the unit come pick him up at the bus stop, etc.

So, they did not grant the leave day and then beat the member over it, they granted him one and then beat him over the head when he asked for another and asked for the unit to pick him up at the bus stop.

"Sarge, can I have Tuesday off as well?  The car still isn't fixed yet."
"Denied".
"Okay, I'll get the bus back.  Can you ask one of the boys if they can swing by the bus/train/whatever station on the way into work Tuesday morning to pick me up?"
"No.  Take a taxi."
"Roger out".

Wow.  Certainly made the 20 minutes to type up the PDR worthwhile to let Bloggins know that he's being a burden administratively.

Okay, I'll wait to hear if the OP finds something in their local orders and directives before posting further.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

The "Sgt" isn't the one who would auth the leave.  I could recommend but not approve when I was a SNCO.

Also, no one has thought to ask why the Sgt was annoyed.  Could be the OP has a past of 'fast balls'.  If I was say, the Tn Sgt and had only 1 driver who was qualified on a certain piece of equipment for a week, and that MSE Op Cpl "broke down" 5 hours from home and I had to recall someone in from leave or course or whatever, I'd be pissed off too.  Doesn't mean the Sgt is 'a bad NCO/leader'.

I said early, lots of assumptions being made on a (IMO) biased input; that being the mbr who is facing the adverse PER.

 

[ModlrMike]

Having read this from the start, I have a few observations:

1. While you don't need a leave pass to travel on normal time off, most units have a geographic boundaries policy for just such an issue as this. Perhaps in the future if the member decides to leave town he'll submit a weekend leave pass. Some units still make use of a weekend sign-out book, but that's steadily going by the wayside.

2. You can't approve leave after it has been expended. If you do, it's fraud; I would not sign it. Better the member takes care to fill out a weekend leave pass before they depart.

3. If, as the member claims he was told "the rules don't apply to SNCOs", or words to that effect, then that's a colossal failure of leadership.

4. That the member did what was asked of them following an emergency, should be enough. Unless the member has a consistent pattern of behavior, it's also a failure of leadership to give them an adverse PDR for a single transgression such as this. Other issues perhaps warrant more direct correction. I think there is some commendation to be made to the member here for having the contact numbers to hand. What if he didn't?

5. There's a learning opportunity here for the chain of command, if they choose to recognize it.

 

[ballz]

"Sarge, can I have Tuesday off as well?  The car still isn't fixed yet."
"Denied".
"Okay, I'll get the bus back.  Can you ask one of the boys if they can swing by the bus/train/whatever station on the way into work Tuesday morning to pick me up?"
"No.  Take a taxi."
"Roger out".

Wow.  Certainly made the 20 minutes to type up the PDR worthwhile to let Bloggins know that he's being a burden administratively.

You're very focussed on this one occurrence not being a big deal, but you don't know how many times this member has found himself in similar predicaments that become the CoC's problem. The old "but Sgt, I just need a little exception made this one time..." stuff becomes old real quick when it's not just "this one time." The 20 minutes will be well worth it if the member continues to be a burden and the CoC decides to put him on IC and they need some sort of documentation to support an IC for another "just this one time" occurrence.  Like I said,

Generally, the CoC seems to be able to use discretion in these cases. However, this means that sometimes it uses it's discretion the other way. I don't know the OP, but I do know any time I've issued a 5b PDR, it was never because of one isolated incident, the member usually has it coming.

But please, carry on undermining another CoC's decision and encouraging this lad to feel like he's been wronged when you have no idea what the actual situation is. When he does something foolish and grieves a 5b PDR, and shows his CoC that he is too stubborn to smarten up, he'll be able to thank and and all of those around him who failed to support the CoC in correcting his behaviour.

I think there is some commendation to be made to the member here for having the contact numbers to hand. What if he didn't?

Really? A pat-on-the-back for being able to contact his CoC? Is that how low we're setting the bar now for initiative on the member's part? If he didn't, he'd be charged for being AWOL, with *maybe* some lenience since he is a Pte(T) and *if* he has no past history.

Certainly no pat-on-the-backs required for having that little tiny bit of initiative required to have your Sect 2IC or Sect Comd's phone number saved in your cell phone.

 

[rocksteady]

Someone show me the policy that states you must pickup your phone?  Or the one that says you must have a phone?  Or the one that says you must provide your phone number if you do have a phone?

The military often sticks their nose too far into people's private lives.  I can understand if you are say "on call" like for example a SAR Tech than you would be obligated to be reachable by phone or if they gave you a blackberry for that express purpose.  But if you are just away for the weekend or on leave than I don't see where it says you are obligated to be reachable by phone.

 

[ModlrMike]

Someone show me the policy that states you must pickup your phone?  Or the one that says you must have a phone?  Or the one that says you must provide your phone number if you do have a phone?

The military often sticks their nose too far into people's private lives.  I can understand if you are say "on call" like for example a SAR Tech than you would be obligated to be reachable by phone or if they gave you a blackberry for that express purpose.  But if you are just away for the weekend or on leave than I don't see where it says you are obligated to be reachable by phone.

Considering that members are liable for recall from leave (QR&O 16.01), and the CF100 contains a box for a telephone number, I would infer an obligation to provide a telephone number of some sort. Having provided said number, there might be an obligation to answer it when it rings.

 

[Occam]

Considering that members are liable for recall from leave (QR&O 16.01), and the CF100 contains a box for a telephone number, I would infer an obligation to provide a telephone number of some sort. Having provided said number, there might be an obligation to answer it when it rings.

QR&O 16.01 deals with withholding and recall from leave, though.  When you go home at the end of the day at 1600 until you report for work at 0800 the next day (or whatever your CO determines your regular hours of work are), you're not on leave.  You're also not on leave when you pack it in on Friday afternoon at 1600 until you report for work at 0800 on Monday (note there is no type of leave designated as "Weekend" when not used in conjunction with another type of leave reckoned in days, according to the leave manual).

Unless you're in one of those positions where you're explicitly told that you're on X hours notice for recall and must either be reachable by phone, or check in with your unit periodically to ensure no recall exists (the MARLANTORD dealing with Ready Duty Ship comes to mind), under what obligation is a member to answer the phone during silent hours during the week or over a weekend?

 

[rocksteady]

Considering that members are liable for recall from leave (QR&O 16.01), and the CF100 contains a box for a telephone number, I would infer an obligation to provide a telephone number of some sort. Having provided said number, there might be an obligation to answer it when it rings.

No disrespect but "inferring an obligation and "might be an obligation" doesn't sound like an obligation to provide a telephone number.  I would infer you don't have to provide a phone number as there is nothing stating you do.  The CF100 also contains a box for an address but I have often said "Touring xxxcountry" without any address.  I suppose you could put your personal cellphone number but if you are in a foreign country you may not even have your phone with you.  Furthermore, even if you do provide the phone number there is nothing stating you must answer your phone.  The QR & O simply states you are liable for recall.  Not your fault if you can't be reached and there is nothing written to my knowledge that states you must answer your phone much less provide your phone number or even own a phone for that matter.

I think what happens in the military is that people get use to doing things for so long that no one questions why things are done and whether it is actually a requirement or just a long standing practice.

 

[George Wallace]

I think what happens in the military is that people get use to doing things for so long that no one questions why things are done and whether it is actually a requirement or just a long standing practice.

I am sure many of us are the type that when told to not put our hand on the hot burner plate, we really don't have to have a long drawn out dissertation as to why?  However, many new members today do have to have a long graphic wiz-bang .ppt to explain why one does not put their hand on a hot burner plate.  Times really have changed. 

 

[PMedMoe]

I think what happens in the military is that people get use to doing things for so long that no one questions why things are done and whether it is actually a requirement or just a long standing practice.

And given your posting history, I'd take anything you think with a large grain of salt.

 

[Occam]

I am sure many of us are the type that when told to not put our hand on the hot burner plate, we really don't have to have a long drawn out dissertation as to why?  However, many new members today do have to have a long graphic wiz-bang .ppt to explain why one does not put their hand on a hot burner plate.  Times really have changed.

That would be a valid observation, if the discussion was about hot burner plates.  It's not.

 

[ModlrMike]

No disrespect but "inferring an obligation and "might be an obligation" doesn't sound like an obligation to provide a telephone number.  I would infer you don't have to provide a phone number as there is nothing stating you do.  The CF100 also contains a box for an address but I have often said "Touring xxxcountry" without any address.  I suppose you could put your personal cellphone number but if you are in a foreign country you may not even have your phone with you.  Furthermore, even if you do provide the phone number there is nothing stating you must answer your phone.  The QR & O simply states you are liable for recall.  Not your fault if you can't be reached and there is nothing written to my knowledge that states you must answer your phone much less provide your phone number or even own a phone for that matter.

I think what happens in the military is that people get use to doing things for so long that no one questions why things are done and whether it is actually a requirement or just a long standing practice.

I guess some people just have a higher sense of duty.

 

[George Wallace]

That would be a valid observation, if the discussion was about hot burner plates.  It's not.

It is a valid observation if persons, such as the person I replied to, are needing detailed explanations on matters that have been carried out for years in a systematic way to maintain the efficient functioning of military units/organizations according to SOPs and Unit Orders that have been specifically set out for those units/organizations.  Just because a young soldier CAN NOT accept being told to do something without out a detailed explanation as to why they must do something, does not make it unacceptable to be told to do it.   

Would we have to explain to soldiers like rocksteady why they have to inhale and then exhale?  We have been inhaling oxygen and exhaling oxygen and carbon dioxide since the dawn of time.  Just because there are no instructions on how to breath, does not mean that one would not do it unless their superior explained it all to them. 


But ....what the hay.....I got suckered into this once again.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I guess some people just have a higher sense of duty.

I'm going to go against my normal flow and agree with 'Rocksteady'...................I have a higher sense of duty, it's called My Family.  If I'm just Joe Average, and don't have some form of readiness imposed on my unit, then I'm off and enjoying time away from work.  If something large enough to warrant a needed callback happened, I'm pretty damn sure it would make the news, and then I'd expect callbacks.
If you're not going to issue me a Govt. cell phone then don't expect you're always going to get an answer..........if I even have a cell phone.

Leave the 80's in the 80's folks..............sometimes they weren't all that damn good.

 

[TCM621]

I guess some people just have a higher sense of duty.

The question isn't one of will you pick up the phone, it is are you required to. In other words, if you are on weekend leave and you head into the woods for two day without a cell phone, will you get in trouble?

This is part of a larger issue. There are certain things people think are requirements because "things have always been that way" but there isn't necessarily any basis for it. 15 years ago, one had to go to the unit library or the orderly room to ask for access to the leave policy manual, now I can access it from my phone or computer in minutes. This complete and immediate access to information means people will question assertions of fact based on habit or tradition.  Leaders today have a requirement, even more so than before, to be fully read up on policy and seek clarification when issues arise.

 

[Occam]

Bruce gets it.

It's called "job creep".  I'm not talking about personnel who might justifiably be called in due to the unique nature of their job, such as SAR Techs, pilots, etc.  This is about the normal rank and file.

You're a 8-4 worker in Ottawa.  You have meetings outside your normal place of work, keeping you away from your desk.  Your boss wants you to get a BlackBerry so that you can be accessible while you're outside of the office at other work locations.  Then, when you're at home at 2000, your BlackBerry buzzes and it's an e-mail from Esquimalt.  They need authorization for something.  You figure "what the heck", and send the 30 second reply.  It happens again the next night.  This time you ignore it, figuring you can deal with it in the morning.  The next morning, there's an irate superior wanting to know why you sent a response the night before, but ignored it the previous night - and they know you read it because they got a read receipt on the e-mail.  The next thing you know, you're responding to e-mails during your off time simply because it's expected of you.  Your wife wonders why you always have your nose pointed at the BlackBerry, when you're sitting at home in the evening or on weekends.

One thing I've learned since I got out and started working for the PS, is that seldom does something require a silent hours response for the vast majority of us.  If I manage a part that's required to enable a ship to sail, then there's someone at an IOR cell who has the authority to issue on my behalf and they let me know about it the next day.  I take my work laptop home with me when I take more than a day or two of leave, but that's my personal preference because I don't like coming back to work and facing 300 e-mails in the queue.  I'd rather check in once and a while during my vacation and put out fires as they happen.  A lot of people aren't like that, though, and when they're out of the office, the BlackBerry gets shut off and they're not picking up their home phone - and you cannot fault them for that.