|
vulturesrow posted:It basically boils down to what your authorizing official will sign off on. this. I don't touch travel anymore but when I was an AO I maliciously denied anything to goldbricking
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 18:33 |
|
|
buttplug posted:The gently caress is a "chow bill"? I've never seen a wardroom let officers get out of paying for all their meals (automatically if underway, or on a per meal basis inport) along with their wardroom dues. I wasn't navy so I can't comment on wardroom poo poo on the navy side but cg side underway meals for officers were still on the old sign up for meals bit. dues only covered the wardroom coffee mess poo poo. there was one guy in particular that I would gently caress with who used to rock the old LCDR(S) in his sig that I used to catch on duty days trying to scam leftovers from the galley specifically so he didn't have to sign up for meals. To be clear I don't mean on his duty days, I mean mine when I'd be on the mess deck as the OOD and he'd come back to the ship to ask if they had any leftovers they were gonna trash. He wasn't the only one doing it, but he was the one I saw doing it every duty day. his justification was that his BAS was less than an enlisted persons, but ignored the fact that an enlisted person (in the cg) will never see a cent of BAS regardless of how many meals they do or don't take aboard ship. my gripe was predominantly with pathological cheapskates who were always trying to rules-lawyer me into getting them out of quarters/GMR on the ship's dime
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
buttplug posted:Yea that's pretty bad. I can't speak for the CG, but in the Navy, the CDO/OOD is generally (on most ships, not all) required to "sample the mess" after/during their watch to make sure it's not all hosed up (and then evaluate it). But asking for leftovers at the end of the day? That's pretty hosed up. He was definitely the worst offender. Like I said, he wasn't even the OOD. I was. He came back to the ship from home, or whatever the gently caress else he was doing to try to scam free galley food. Considering the quality of your typical I/P duty day galley scrap, for his $4.65 (or less) he could get way "better" food from say a McDonald's or something. I dunno, that dude definitely had something wrong with him. The justification I got when I asked about the meal sign-in system was that they didn't want to gently caress around with starting/stopping the Officer BAS every time we pulled into port because the pay system wasn't reliable and it would end up with people's pay getting hosed to hell and back. I don't argue with or blame them for that particular decision.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
MancXVI posted:I guess pay getting hosed up is totally cool for enlisted, though. Cool. Enlisted people attached to a ship didn't get BAS, in-port or otherwise. Unless they went TDY >30 days or were on leave.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
MancXVI posted:As a former enlisted person who went on a ship as part of a detachment and had BAS suspended and reinstated each time (even for periods of, like, a week), I think it's dumb that they handle it differently at the officer level. I don't really disagree with you, but would you trust an E2 with four kids to write you a check?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
MancXVI posted:No, but I think the opposite approach should be taken. They're already taking pay automatically from enlisteds, why not just do it across the board? I think a charge-to-pay system based on usage would be the closest-to-fair solution, but that creates funding fluctuations since galley budgets (not sure how the Navy handles this) are revolving based on input. Basically, if everyone is paying all the time, the cash body ends up having a surplus and can put people in violation of the ADA for unlawful augmentations, and if you're only going on usage and you're in-port for a long time you'll hit a shortfall and won't be able to meet the logistical requirements pre-patrol. The enlisted crew likely shoulders the burden because in the case and situation I'm talking about, it was a ship with maybe 10 or 12 officers and 100 enlisted people, plus an aircrew for most of any given patrol. 10-12 people giving up the $265/mo or whatever Os get isn't going to cut it for loading stores prior to sailing. anyway this derail sucks and I'm sorry
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
Boon posted:I know you think you're too smart for this poo poo, but you're possibly the most naive individual in GiP. gently caress this, show those squares who's boss. go hitch across alaska and just like, live off the land, man. what an adventure that would be 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
So in the Navy eval process there's a board comprised of chiefs and/or officers at a command that may or may not be in or even anywhere near your chain, and quite certainly not within your rating dealing with your evals? Am I reading that right?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
PneumonicBook posted:Yes but if the chiefs that do know you are worth a poo poo they'll fight for you on the board assuming you're not a piece of poo poo. The idea of someone not in my own rating or at least nominally within my supervisory chain of command dealing with my eval sounds like total bullshit. Especially for reasons like what ... whoever it was earlier talking about having small inputs once whatever they work on is boiled down to the unclas level. Jesus Christ. Make's the CG's eval system seem downright awesome by comparison.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:The ranking boards are just figuring out who gets the #1 EP, #2 EP, etc within the reporting senior's group. Your eval is still written and routed through your chain of command, and your reporting senior still has the final call on how to rank people. The only things done by a board completely outside of your command are selection boards for things like chief and O-4+. I don't think I'm going to get it, especially since I'm not subject to it. I'm not sure without me experiencing it directly I'd understand it, or think it's a good idea. I get having to play the game though, so I suppose I'll leave it at that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 18:33 |
|
|
Pandasmores posted:Beyond basic medical stuff, I have no reason to look up anything about them. Having a general understanding of how the world around you works is, in general, beneficial.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2015 04:01
|
|