No more off base TDY reimbursement

[Jaded]

A commander can always give you paperwork for whatever he wants.

[Prosuper]

Been doing this since 1981, back then when you went tdy to a military base and if you stayed off base you better have non availability form when you filed to get paid. What has changed?

[Herk Driver]

Q: What has changed?

A: The travel regulations that govern reimbursement.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[faipmafiaofficial]

30 minutes ago, Jaded said:

A commander can always give you paperwork for whatever he wants.

Even if what you do is legal/not wrong?

[Homestar]

14 minutes ago, faipmafiaofficial said:

Even if what you do is legal/not wrong?

Quibbling.

[Jaded]

25 minutes ago, faipmafiaofficial said:

Even if what you do is legal/not wrong?

Yes. There's no "appeal" to an LOR, and you're not entitled to a lawyer.

[faipmafiaofficial]

1 minute ago, Jaded said:

Yes. There's no "appeal" to an LOR, and you're not entitled to a lawyer.

Lol fair enough. Who cares about regs then

[Herk Driver]

Yes. There's no "appeal" to an LOR, and you're not entitled to a lawyer.

Partially correct. You are entitled to an ADC but they don't necessarily stand in the room with you. They would do nothing else...

The AFBCMR is actually the "appeal authority" for just about anything and is beholden to no one. You have to make a very persuasive argument but they can right an injustice.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Jaded]

2 hours ago, Herk Driver said:

Partially correct. You are entitled to an ADC but they don't necessarily stand in the room with you. They would do nothing else...

The AFBCMR is actually the "appeal authority" for just about anything and is beholden to no one. You have to make a very persuasive argument but they can right an injustice.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

If your CC is going to give you an LOR, you are entitled to an ADC?

[pawnman]

6 hours ago, Jaded said:

If your CC is going to give you an LOR, you are entitled to an ADC?

The ADC will help you draft a rebuttal, but LORs are considered "administrative" and not "punitive"...so there's no due process and no fighting it.

[Herk Driver]

The ADC will help you draft a rebuttal, but LORs are considered "administrative" and not "punitive"...so there's no due process and no fighting it.

Correct, they are administrative and not punitive, but an LOR can be "fought" through the AFBCMR. They are also an admin panel and not beholden to anyone in the chain of command, but have tremendous power.

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Jaded]

2 hours ago, Herk Driver said:

Correct, they are administrative and not punitive, but an LOR can be "fought" through the AFBCMR. They are also an admin panel and not beholden to anyone in the chain of command, but have tremendous power.

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

Interesting - the more you know. I would assume that the success rate at AFBCMR appeals are very low, but I doubt that is an available statistic. 

[Herk Driver]

On this topic, while not a direct "appeal" for an LOR, you also have the option of filing an Art 138 appeal asking a re-dress of grievance. An Article 138 is for any grievance you have but in this case if an LOR is completely out of bounds for you performing a legal and justified act, it may be possible to get some things overturned. I will say that I have not seen one succeed but have only seen two...


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[Bode]

On this topic, while not a direct "appeal" for an LOR, you also have the option of filing an Art 138 appeal asking a re-dress of grievance. An Article 138 is for any grievance you have but in this case if an LOR is completely out of bounds for you performing a legal and justified act, it may be possible to get some things overturned. I will say that I have not seen one succeed but have only seen two...


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

I saw one succeed on an attempted admin sep of an Amn. Went to the NAF/CC and back in 4 days. I was completely shocked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lord Ratner]

On 2/24/2017 at 2:39 AM, faipmafiaofficial said:

Where does it say they can override the JTR and order you to stay on base? Been looking for a week for this

It's not about overriding. The JTR only specifies what you get paid. So your commander cannot stop you from getting paid, if it happens. But your commander can order you not to do something that you would get paid for BEFORE you do it, and it would be legal. Then, if you disobeyed, you would still get paid per JTR rules, but you can be punished for not following an order. 

Two examples. You have a TDY coming up, leaving from an airport 45 minutes away. Commander tells you to use the base shuttle service to save the squadron money. You're a piece of shit, so you just take a cab because you didn't want to use the base long-term parking lot. JTR says you will be reimbursed for the cab. Commander says you get an LOR for telling her you would use the shuttle. Both happen.

You, a C-17 AC assigned to UPT, want to take a T-6 to San Francisco for the 2017 Brony convention in the Castro district. Commander says the squadron can't afford it. You tell him you and your hetero life partner, a FAIP, will stay at a friend's house in Alameda to save the squadron mad cash. But when you get there, your FAIP mentor immediately finds himself overwhelmed by a deluge of nonbinary polysexual panda-kin sex addicts. Swept away by the raw sexual fury and unkempt body hair of your fellow Brony convention-goers, you decide to each get your own hotel rooms in the heart of San Fran, where the lodging per diem is a conservative $12,500 per night. After returning to Vance in what can best be described as the moistest T-6 in the fleet, you submit your travel voucher. Seconds later, the lights go out, because your voucher was so expensive the squadron had no choice but you use the pot of money dedicated to utilities to fund your pseudo intra-species erotica vacation. Your commander, who for some reason looks just like a certain purple Clydesdale you got way too close to over the weekend, is reasonably upset. Per JTR rules, you must be reimbursed for the lodging. Per UCMJ and AFI, your commander is entitled to rip off your souvenir unicorn horn and stab it straight through your lying heart. 

See? Discipline and reimbursement are separate issues. 

Edited February 25, 2017 by Lord Ratner

[Guest]

See? Discipline and reimbursement are separate issues. 

The problem is that we have commanders disciplining people when they don't actually cause the gov't any extra expense. If I don't want to stay at the VQ, and am willing and able to pay out-of-pocket the difference between off-base and VQ, why should I be punished for doing so? There is no legitimate military necessity for me to stay on base; it should be unlawful for a commander to order me to do so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lord Ratner]

51 minutes ago, ihtfp06 said:

 

The problem is that we have commanders disciplining people when they don't actually cause the gov't any extra expense. If I don't want to stay at the VQ, and am willing and able to pay out-of-pocket the difference between off-base and VQ, why should I be punished for doing so? There is no legitimate military necessity for me to stay on base; it should be unlawful for a commander to order me to do so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

This is not entirely accurate. The whole reason we have hotels on base is so they can get their hands on the travel money. They lose it all when you go to a Marriott. I'm not saying I agree with the strategy, but if you don't think Wing Commanders are constantly updated on how well the revenue generators are doing, you're incorrect. 

It's the same thing with the O-Clubs. Of course the AF, in it's perpetual quest to deny the long-established fundamentals of business and human motivation (pilot retention, alcohol policies, sexual assault training, mandatory fun runs, etc), has determined that the way to make a restaurant/hotel/bowling center profitable is not to increase the quality and value of the product to increase volume of sales, but to instead limit alternative options through restrictions and mandatory attendance. 

You know... just like Amazon incentivizes you to shop there by banning you from Best Buy.

[Champ Kind]

I'm sure someone smarter than me, but to where does the $69/night we spend at "Air Force Inns" go?

My understanding is that lodging falls under the FSS, which falls under the base MSG.  That's what every receipt I get says, at least.  

Unless it is going to a for-profit company that has some sort of scheme set up with the AF to provide exactly what their contract says they have to provide for lodging (and not one bit more), then why do we pay for on-base lodging at all?  Seems like gov't money just recirculating through the budgetary system.

[pawnman]

2 hours ago, Champ Kind said:

I'm sure someone smarter than me, but to where does the $69/night we spend at "Air Force Inns" go?

My understanding is that lodging falls under the FSS, which falls under the base MSG.  That's what every receipt I get says, at least.  

Unless it is going to a for-profit company that has some sort of scheme set up with the AF to provide exactly what their contract says they have to provide for lodging (and not one bit more), then why do we pay for on-base lodging at all?  Seems like gov't money just recirculating through the budgetary system.

I was wondering this myself.  If no one stays on base for a month, the Air Force pays for the utilities, salaries, upkeep, etc.  If everyone stays on base for a month, the Air Force is paying for utilities, salaries, upkeep, etc.  It seems like the only place where the Air Force comes out ahead on this one is when people stay on base when they are not on orders (leave, retired dude on vacation, etc).

[BFM this]

The Air Force is a bureaucracy. The one truth with any bureaucracy is that it seeks growth. If the MSG/WG/CC posts $XX,XX3,### cash flows one year, posting $XX,XX4,### cash flow the next is a feather in the plume. QoL, strategic need, and stewardship can all be damned.
See also: Joint Basing.
ETA: anyone who thinks that RPA CPIP, 11F retention, or Sq re-vitalization are anything but min-run eye-wash initiatives is deluding themselves.
Exhibit A: Shaw MCE


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[faipmafiaofficial]

4 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

This is not entirely accurate. The whole reason we have hotels on base is so they can get their hands on the travel money. They lose it all when you go to a Marriott. I'm not saying I agree with the strategy, but if you don't think Wing Commanders are constantly updated on how well the revenue generators are doing, you're incorrect. 

It's the same thing with the O-Clubs. Of course the AF, in it's perpetual quest to deny the long-established fundamentals of business and human motivation (pilot retention, alcohol policies, sexual assault training, mandatory fun runs, etc), has determined that the way to make a restaurant/hotel/bowling center profitable is not to increase the quality and value of the product to increase volume of sales, but to instead limit alternative options through restrictions and mandatory attendance. 

You know... just like Amazon incentivizes you to shop there by banning you from Best Buy.

The JTR was written to encourage competition.  "If you don't like your room, just go off base"  That SHOULD cause base lodging to raise their game to get our business.  Competition increases quality of product.  10 times out of 10 Base lodging sucks compared to off base lodging.  Outdated/dirty/broken...etc base lodging rooms are the norm.  Instead of renovating and fixing issues to compete in the market, wing leadership just forces people (up to 5 people in a 1 bedroom, 450 sq ft TLF)  to stay in them and doesn't waste the money to fix anything.  

Good times in the AF right now, good times

 

Edited February 25, 2017 by faipmafiaofficial

[Jaded]

4 hours ago, BFM this said:

Exhibit A: Shaw MCE
 

Story - go.

[BFM this]

Story - go.

https://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/1048679/af-selects-shaw-afb-as-the-preferred-location-to-host-a-new-rpa-unit.aspx


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums

[SurelySerious]

You wanted "better" locations, no?

[GlassEmpty]

On 2/13/2017 at 8:50 PM, ThreeHoler said:

 

It says that. But has anyone here ever seen it on their report or someone else's after 60 days?

 

Yes. We've seen people do this at March and actually lose the card. A CC can approve an account one more time if you've broke the 120 day mark. If you go thru it again, you'll be banned indefinitely. If you go through the proper channels and address it, you can get big AF involved before the 120 days. Messing with the collections and company on debt owed isn't the AF problem. Its ignorance to think they'll protect you.