- Reaction score
- 22,529
- Points
- 1,360
Pusser, I will agree with you that the program is theoretically more flexible than before.
That said, when people are involved, reality and theory can be different.
Based on my observations, we have not come out ahead on this. I have found on numerous occasions that the onus of ensuring a move is executed properly is devolved to the member. Three times I have been told to "review the CFIRP Annual Policy" to clarify what I am entitled to, asked the BGRS agent about what I have found, then waited while they then went back to the "mother ship" (DCBA) to confirm what the policy (which appeared clear enough in the CFIRP Annual Policy). I have had money garnisheed of my military pay through actions of a relocation agent who believed that I had been over compensated IAW regulations/policy, only to have to fight months to have such adjustments (which were incorrect) corrected. The sheer amount of time taken to sort these situations out, let alone the frustration and loss of personal time to address this outside of my official duties, leaves me yearning very strongly for the days when moves were the case of a half-day or two in the Base R&D section, followed by a quick visit down the hall to Base Traffic.
Your and my cases are but two of tens of thousands, and we can only speak to our personal experiences or those of whom we have spoken on the issue. That said, I have no acquaintances who have ever maintained the position that CFIRP is "better" than the old system, so that would be at least several tens of people who had similar frustrations to me.
If the "theoretical flexibility" was actioned consistently in the spirit that the Treasury Board intended, that would be a good thing.
Regards
G2G
That said, when people are involved, reality and theory can be different.
Based on my observations, we have not come out ahead on this. I have found on numerous occasions that the onus of ensuring a move is executed properly is devolved to the member. Three times I have been told to "review the CFIRP Annual Policy" to clarify what I am entitled to, asked the BGRS agent about what I have found, then waited while they then went back to the "mother ship" (DCBA) to confirm what the policy (which appeared clear enough in the CFIRP Annual Policy). I have had money garnisheed of my military pay through actions of a relocation agent who believed that I had been over compensated IAW regulations/policy, only to have to fight months to have such adjustments (which were incorrect) corrected. The sheer amount of time taken to sort these situations out, let alone the frustration and loss of personal time to address this outside of my official duties, leaves me yearning very strongly for the days when moves were the case of a half-day or two in the Base R&D section, followed by a quick visit down the hall to Base Traffic.
Your and my cases are but two of tens of thousands, and we can only speak to our personal experiences or those of whom we have spoken on the issue. That said, I have no acquaintances who have ever maintained the position that CFIRP is "better" than the old system, so that would be at least several tens of people who had similar frustrations to me.
If the "theoretical flexibility" was actioned consistently in the spirit that the Treasury Board intended, that would be a good thing.
Regards
G2G