• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Posting Policy-Restricted (IR) & Prohibited moves [MERGED]

  • Thread starter Thread starter maniac779
  • Start date Start date
Captloadie stated, "As for the relocation leave issue, it isn't a MUST for the CO to grant. He can deny the requested dates for a myriad of reasons, just like any other leave he signs off on. The policy just states he shouldn't without justification. I'm sure plenty of members can tell stories of being put on exercise/DOM OP/traingin immediately upon arrival and given the five days later".


Actually, the CO must give the leave and your post itself states this.  Never did I say that the CO must give it right when you move into your new home, but I said that he must give it.  You agree with this by saying, "... and given the five days later."  I did state that the CF Leave Policy Manual states that it can be given in non-consecutive days.  Believe me, prior to giving anybody advice, I do my research and give them the correct answer.  I do this for all questions that are asked of me by my pers if I don't immediately know the policy.  I don't want to give false hope to my pers or others on this site by giving them duff info.
 
Pusser said:
The RFD Date is the day youi actually show up for work, in uniform, ready to start.  Your RFD Date shout NOT be the closing date of your new home.  How can you possibly put in a day's work at your new job, when you will spending a good chunk of that day at the lawyer's office, picking up keys, etc?  Remember that Relocation Leave is specifically designed for performing the administration of moving into your new home.  Closing the deal is part of that.

Once you arrive at your new location, the gaps between the arrival of your F&E and your RFD need to be covered somehow.  You can use any combination of Relocation Leave, Annual Leave or work to fill those gaps that works for you.  Remember that if you are arriving on time, the day you arrive is a travel (i.e. duty) day and is not counted as anything else.

As long as all days are consecutive,m there is absolutely no reason that Annual Leave and Special Leave - Relocation cannot be on the same leave pass.  In fact, depending on the circumstances, it is entirely feasible that a single leave pass could include, Annual, Weekend, Short and a variety of forms of Special Leave all on the same document.  Why kill another tree?

I am telling pers what is reality out there, not what it should be.  I agree that it is silly that we must make our RFD so close to the close of the new home, but this is what Brookfield is telling everybody, including my pers being posted and me.  Brookfield wanted my RFD to be on the day of my unpack.  By your reasoning, I would have to go to work and leave my wife to supervise the unpack all by herself.  This would not work.  Like I said, I have had and will have reasonable bosses who use logic and allow(ed) me to "report for duty" by phoning in and saying that I am safe and sound in the new area.  Then I carry out all other necessary business on that day.  It is nice to say what it should be in theory, but I am only telling everybody what it is like in reality.  The real kicker here is that why does Brookfield and ultimately DND tell us to have the closing dates for both the old and new homes on the same days?  How is this realistically possible?  Yet, this is what Brookfield is telling our CF members due to direction from DND.  I asked my Brookfield rep this question and the answer that I got was, this is just the policy!

The policy at every unit that I have been at, so I assumed that this was the CF's direction, was that special leave needed to be on different leave passes than annual.  If not, great, I agree that we shouldn't kill so many trees!

To everybody, remember, each person's move situation will be different.  Instead of finding holes to poke in my posting, why not ask questions about your specific situation and then there are more than enough pers on this site that have the knowledge to help you. 

 
Scoobs said:
but I am only telling everybody what it is like in reality.

"reality" in so far as it has applied to you.


The real kicker here is that why does Brookfield and ultimately DND tell us to have the closing dates for both the old and new homes on the same days?

They do not say that.

Yet, this is what Brookfield is telling our CF members due to direction from DND.

If BGRS is saying that, it is not due to direction from DND.

I asked my Brookfield rep this question and the answer that I got was, this is just the policy!

That answer is incorrect.

was that special leave needed to be on different leave passes than annual. 

This is not Cf policy. I have many leave passes containing both.

Instead of finding holes to poke in my posting, why not ask questions about your specific situation 

Because my situation is unique from everyone else and besides, my situation is nobody's buisness. If i have questions, i know where to go ask and where to look. If you are unhappy with the reaction your posts get, it is a simple fix.............
 
CDN Aviator,

First, my response was not directed towards you.  To say that "reality in so far as it has applied to you" is not correct.  I actually read the IRP Directive.  I actually read the leave policies.  I actually ask and get responses in email from the Brookfield rep so as to cover myself if Brookfield was to deny a claim. So, yes, this is reality for me.  However, I will not be treated differently as compared to other pers, so this is the same as other pers.  I posted info based on the typical posting, a sell of a home, a purchase of a new home, and then a move.  Yes, your situation is more than likely different, but this does not preclude you or anyone from learning from what I or other posters have went through in regards to Brookfield and some of the silly IRP regulations.

Also, yes, my Brookfield rep told me to my face that DND wants us to close on both homes on the same day.  Why would I make this stuff up? 

Also, note that I never stated the CF policy was that annual and special leave did not go on the same leave pass.  Read my post again.  I stated that my unit's policy was.  Whether or not this is correct is not for me to decide (nor you), I only stated what happens.

Also, if your situation is nobody's business, then why are you even reading, yet posting, comments on this thread?  You'll note that I don't post that often, but have been a long time member of Army.ca.  This is because I would like to offer my opinion/advice on issues, but more than not, I see people getting ripped to shreads just because they may say something and the reader doesn't actually read the exact words, interprets what they want to hear, and then throws a fit via posts.
 
Scoobs said:
  Why would I make this stuff up? 

I'm sorry, i was not clear. I am saying that BGRS is making it up. I have had my share of DND moves and have yet to close old and new homes on the same day.
 
All very good, but reading the actual reference would saved some time.

A-PM-245 Chap 7 Annex A Appendix 4
DIN: http://hr.dwan.dnd.ca/DHRIM/mhrrp/ch07/engraph/CH07A04_e.asp

Bottom line, and as per CFIRP Policy: "The first day of TNL is normally the Change of Strength (COS) date unless there is a change of Report For Duty (RFD) date approved by the losing and gaining COs."

Anything more would be belabouring.
 
Hello, I need some advice...Here is my situation:
-Posted to Victoria and went on an HHT (House Hunting Trip) in July
-HHT unsuccessful
-I realized that going to Victoria on IR (Imposed Restriction) was the way I would have to go for at least 6 months or more so I looked for accommodations for myself.  I found a small one bedroom apartment close to work and within the set amount of $1600, it actually was $1500 per month.
-As per BC regs I put down half a month's rent ($700) to secure the place until I showed up and started living in it.
...All well and good right? 
Here is the kicker
-The posting was cancelled by the career shop in Ottawa due to a myriad of reasons that I had no active role in.  I did not get the news until a week before I was to drive across the country.  I had everything in place for a successful IR period, kids OK, finances in order, wife OK and had a visit schedule, etc..
My question is, How do I get that $700 back, or, is it just lost?  If I have to go through Brookfield I think I will just forget about it because they are obstinant.  Any advice is welcome.  I anticipate a fight with whomever I ask for the money back from.
 
Aha. At last one where I can weigh in with my civvy experience.

Since your $700 was placed as a deposit against a rental agreement where the terms were never met, you should simply draft a letter to Brookfield, and they should refund it. Their admin may take a bit of time, but they are a rather well run organization, and it shouldn't take long.
 
CountDC said:

I know, I know. Actually BPM are a nationwide company, and they rank among the highest for residential tenancies, particularly with tenant satisfaction. I'm sure there are folks who have their issues with them....
 
OK, So here's what I am leaning towards doing.  I will send a registered letter to BGRS (Brookfield Global Relocation Services) explaining my issue and requesting their support and reimbursement of the $700. 

Does this sound like a plan?
 
I really don't see why you don't try the landlord or rental company first.  IIRC, they can't legally keep a security deposit.  Or did you already try them?
 
Their admin may take a bit of time, but they are a rather well run organization, and it shouldn't take long.

I'm intrigued --  compared to...?


To the OP, I'd say as have others, talk to the landlord first...they can probably fill the apt no probs given the vacancy (or lack thereof) rate in Vic.


Regards
G2G
 
East Coaster said:
Does this sound like a plan?

No. The half-month you paid is not to secure the place, it is the damage deposit. The landlord should be reimbursing that to you when you cease to occupy the property ( assuming no damage). If you had a signed lease, there are penalties for breaking it ( 3 month's rent in some provinces) and THAT is also covered by IRP.

I'm a landlord in BC.........
 
Good2Golf said:
I'm intrigued --  compared to...?

Brookfield Property management is "rather well run" in comparisom to other residential property management companies. I however can't comment on their relocation services company. When East Coaster mentioned "Brookfield" I assumed he meant that they were the landlord, not the company handling the relocation, with a separate landlord being involved.

I'd advocate for contacting the landlord directly, and dealing with them.
 
Ahh, well then, that's different.

In the CF, Brookfield Global Relocation Services is the company that does our moves.
 
Indeed.

As a reservist, I've not had to go through a relocation.

I am however a Property Manager civvy side.
 
Seen. 

As PMedMoe says, BGRS in this context is the civilian company that is mandated to provide relcation services to CF members on posting that in years past were provided by CF clerks.  Starting with Royal Lepage Relocation Services then by Brookfield Global Relocation Services, the military posting/relocation services were devolved through the alternate services delivery (ASD) trend that began in the 90's.  Apprently, the ASD intent for relocation services was to provide BETTER services for LESS MONEY.  "Some" have found that their "mileage may have varied" with the actual services provided when compared to when the military provided its own services. 


Regards
G2G
 
Good2Golf said:
Seen. 

As PMedMoe says, BGRS in this context is the civilian company that is mandated to provide relcation services to CF members on posting that in years past were provided by CF clerks.  Starting with Royal Lepage Relocation Services then by Brookfield Global Relocation Services, the military posting/relocation services were devolved through the alternate services delivery (ASD) trend that began in the 90's.  Apprently, the ASD intent for relocation services was to provide BETTER services for LESS MONEY.  "Some" have found that their "mileage may have varied" with the actual services provided when compared to when the military provided its own services. 


Regards
G2G

In answer to the OP's question, your first course of action is to approach the landlord and ask for the money back.  If they refuse, you can then approach BGRS for reimbursement.  The regulations are quite clear that you are entitled to reimbursement of expenses incurred as a result of cancelled postings.  See CBI 209.9962 - Reimbursement on Postponement or Cancellation of a Posting, specifically:

(b) in respect of any amount the member has paid as a deposit or rent or in respect of any liability under a lease for accommodation the member was unable to occupy at the place to which the member was authorized to move prior to postponement or cancellation of the posting; and....


As someone who has been involved in the relocation business of the CF, both under the old system and under the IRP (Royal LePage and then BGRS), I can offer a little insight.

We all tend to look back through rose-coloured glasses and many folks will swear up and down that thing were better before the IRP.  This was simply not true.  Some parts may have been better, but other parts were quantitatively worse.  The worst part of all was a lack of consistency.  Every orderly room in the country (and we had a lot more of them then) interpreted regulations and policy differently and so folks on some bases were receiving things that folks on other bases were not.  Furthermore, the regulations often could not keep up with the policy changes and so we were administering relocations based on stacks of CANFORGENS, while the CFAOs we should have been using simply gathered dust in a corner.  This was all combined with an horrific lack of consistency out of DGCB that swung wildly between approving everything and approving nothing.  It was a mess.

Out of this was born the Integrated Relocation (Pilot) Program.  This was not a DND initiative, but rather a pan-government one.  Although we move more people than anyone else, we are not the only federal government organization to do it and the Government wanted everyone under the same umbrella.  It was not necessarily designed as a cost saving measure, but rather as a means of streamlining and simplifying things.  One of the biggest goals was consistency.  Another goal was to formalize and properly approve policies which were being used, but technically didn't exist (e.g.  reimbursement for home inspection and pet shipment fees wasn't actually an approved policy, but we managed it by using the Special Powers of the Minister (CBI 209.013)).  Yes, the Minister had to approve Fido and Fluffy's trip to a new home.  Obviously, this was not the best way to do this.  The process of instituting the IRP brought many things into line and formalized what had in many cases been "ad hoc" benefits.  However, there was some negative fallout in that certain benefits, which had previously been tax-free became taxable.  The fact is, they should have been taxed all along and so our benefits had actually been in violation of the Income Tax Act.  At least the didn't collect any taxes retroactively!

Based on my observations, we came out ahead on this.  Although there are frustrations (particularly where things seem to have gotten worse), I would say that overall we have a better, more flexible package with more consistency than we had before the IRP.
 
Back
Top