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

National Truck Driver Shortage

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
584
Points
910
So, apparently there is a national shortage of truck drivers. Some people are getting their load day cancelled! Anybody working within CMP/DCBA can offer up options for people? Often, the closing day is 2 days after the load day (after clean)!

1624497491770.png
 

MJP

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
379
Points
980
So, apparently there is a national shortage of truck drivers. Some people are getting their load day cancelled! Anybody working within CMP can offer up options for people? Often, the closing day is 2 days after the load day (after clean)!

View attachment 65554
From my sources at a Local Base Traffic it is less drivers as an issue but more the packing/loading crews they just don't have (but I wouldn't be surprised at the driver bit). Who knew paying your people shitty pay for hard work results in them not wanting to come back to work when there are other options.

The BGRS part of the rant is a red herring as they have nothing to do with moving F&E, that is solely with Base Traffic and managed within the military. That said, I can see more IL&M happening at both ends if the worker shortage carries on which is kinda a BGRS thing in a round about way. But before BGRS can do anything if it falls outside of the CAFRD it becomes a DCBA adjudication thing as BGRS has no ability to give any benefits outside of the CAFRD.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
584
Points
910
From my sources at a Local Base Traffic it is less drivers as an issue but more the packing/loading crews they just don't have (but I wouldn't be surprised at the driver bit). Who knew paying your people shitty pay for hard work results in them not wanting to come back to work when there are other options.

The BGRS part of the rant is a red herring as they have nothing to do with moving F&E, that is solely with Base Traffic and managed within the military. That said, I can see more IL&M happening at both ends if the worker shortage carries on which is kinda a BGRS thing in a round about way. But before BGRS can do anything if it falls outside of the CAFRD it becomes a DCBA adjudication thing as BGRS has no ability to give any benefits outside of the CAFRD.
Extra IL&M is great but when closing date comes, the house needs to be empty! Not sure how I would deal with that!
 

MJP

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
379
Points
980
Extra IL&M is great but when closing date comes, the house needs to be empty! Not sure how I would deal with that!
It is a crappy situation and empathize with anyone stuck in it. It can be pretty messy for folks in what can be a stressful time if there is no flexibility in the incoming homeowners part.

I imagine the national team that manages the contract is looking at how to alleviate the issue (which doesn't help the right now)
 

kev994

Sr. Member
Subscriber
Reaction score
146
Points
610
It is a crappy situation and empathize with anyone stuck in it. It can be pretty messy for folks in what can be a stressful time if there is no flexibility in the incoming homeowners part.

I imagine the national team that manages the contract is looking at how to alleviate the issue (which doesn't help the right now)
Even if there is some flexibility it’s not free and I’m not aware of any policy to cover this.
 

MJP

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
379
Points
980
Even if there is some flexibility it’s not free and I’m not aware of any policy to cover this.
It is policy blackhole that will need DCBA adjudication to cover the gap.
 

Quirky

Sr. Member
Reaction score
122
Points
480
The implications of this will be enormous. It's not a huge deal when your stuff is in a PMQ, CFHA likely has some flexibility for a later vacate date. I wouldn't want to break any contracts on house possessions, it's going to look silly when the truck for the new owner arrives and your house is still full of your boxes. Home ownership while in the CAF just gets less and less appealing.
 

captloadie

Sr. Member
Subscriber
Reaction score
35
Points
330
I think the key here is that it was an IPR move out of a PMQ. As has been previously stated, many of the moving companies end up short staffed this time of year, and demand is high. While I would only be guessing here, if the company contacted F&E and said they had 5 DND moves to do that day, but only 4 crews of people, what's the priority, F&E likely picked to delay the move they perceived to have the least impact.

Also, were there any other posts in that thread that indicated it was an issue being experienced in multiple locations across the CAF, or a single incident out of thousands of moves?
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
584
Points
910
I think the key here is that it was an IPR move out of a PMQ. As has been previously stated, many of the moving companies end up short staffed this time of year, and demand is high. While I would only be guessing here, if the company contacted F&E and said they had 5 DND moves to do that day, but only 4 crews of people, what's the priority, F&E likely picked to delay the move they perceived to have the least impact.

Also, were there any other posts in that thread that indicated it was an issue being experienced in multiple locations across the CAF, or a single incident out of thousands of moves?
Yes, there is one or two posts every day. There is also a notice on the BGRS website.
 

MJP

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
379
Points
980
Also, were there any other posts in that thread that indicated it was an issue being experienced in multiple locations across the CAF, or a single incident out of thousands of moves?
It seems to be a cross-Canada issue this APS
 

materialpigeonfibre

New Member
Reaction score
5
Points
130
I was less than pleased with the lack of response from BGRS. I had to move because of a posting in July 2020 and they didn't answer their phones or emails.

It's a tough situation. Hopefully it works out for them.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
584
Points
910
I received the attached file from my F&E coordinator today.
 

Attachments

  • DGMC-DMCSS_FAQ-HG&E_Final_20210624_U.docx
    32.9 KB · Views: 30

kev994

Sr. Member
Subscriber
Reaction score
146
Points
610
I received the attached file from my F&E coordinator today.
Who is going to pay for all the broken stuff if I have to hire a local company to move my stuff out of my sold house!? Both companies are going to blame the other company! If I can find a mover then United should be able to sub-contract.
 

kev994

Sr. Member
Subscriber
Reaction score
146
Points
610
The more I think of this the more enraging it is. These aren’t even solutions, just a bunch of ideas to figure it out yourself but whatever you do, make sure the $h!! Show we’ve created doesn’t cost us anything, we don’t have a policy for that.
 

Quirky

Sr. Member
Reaction score
122
Points
480
The more I think of this the more enraging it is. These aren’t even solutions, just a bunch of ideas to figure it out yourself but whatever you do, make sure the $h!! Show we’ve created doesn’t cost us anything, we don’t have a policy for that.

But don’t worry, just remain flexible and positive! It’s all good according to the letter. Postings and moves with property obligations are stressful even when everything goes smooth and lines up. Having your stuff packed and no one showing up a day or two before possession date would be a nightmare.
 

kev994

Sr. Member
Subscriber
Reaction score
146
Points
610
But don’t worry, just remain flexible and positive! It’s all good according to the letter. Postings and moves with property obligations are stressful even when everything goes smooth and lines up. Having your stuff packed and no one showing up a day or two before possession date would be a nightmare.
Yeah, don’t try to trade money for possession date, there’s no policy for that, instead, get some unicorns to fart your stuff into your car so you can move it yourself, but don’t rent a trailer, that’s not a reimbursable expense.
 

Pelorus

Member
Reaction score
98
Points
430
Rant incoming, and more geared towards the overall process vice this specific issue since the movers are handled by base transport.

I moved twice in the first part of my career under the old BGRS system, where you met in person with an agent located on base at both ends of the move to handle your claims, etc. They also booked flights and other things like that. You had to fact check them on your own to make sure you weren't getting shortchanged by their poor interpretation of admittedly a fairly convoluted relocation directive, but at least you could justify why the CAF was paying for the service.

I have moved twice now under the new system, and it is truly awful. I won't even be so kind as to call BGRS under the new service model useless, because I think that implies that there's simply no value added. In reality, their role in "facilitating" a move is worse than useless as they are an active hindrance to a successful move.

Twice now I have asked for clarification of an ambiguous part of the relocation directive (although a fairly commonplace situation I'd imagine) via email, and then followed it up with a phone call because the email was not being replied to in a timely manner. And in both cases I eventually received directly conflicting information between the phone rep and the email rep.

I have had multiple claims as part of a move partially or fully rejected because some braindead analyst at BGRS corporate (who I can't speak with to explain the situation) has decided that my expense was not covered, or the receipt didn't meet some arbitrary standard of evidence. In many of these cases it's because the situation slightly deviates from the textbook example they had in mind, so all of the relevant information can't neatly fit into the paint-by-numbers section of their website for a specific type of claim (and they apparently don't read the freeform comments attached to the bottom of the claim which lays it out).

By this point I am a fairly experienced member of the CAF who has attended this rodeo a few times, who has held a number of positions which require me to sift through DND/CAF directives or other GC legal-ese, and I still run into frustrating roadblocks and confusing situations every move. I can only imagine how frustrating it is for our junior pers (Officer or NCM) trying to make sense of this garbage, especially if they have a complex move involving dependents, pets, multiple vehicles, etc.

I guess ultimately my question about this whole shitshow comes down to: what advantage do we as an organization gain by having this corporate parasite leech funds from the GC off of every move, just to add a bunch of confusion and stress to the already stressful process of a geographic relocation?

Why can't I take my posting message to my nearest BOR, have a clerk punch in some basic criteria (e.g., distance, sale/rental intentions, # of dependents, etc.) and have the computer return a lump sum estimate of the cost of that move based off of current market rates? Get that amount in advance with the explicit expectation that the member be ready to RFD at their new unit on the date agreed upon by the gaining/losing unit, no receipts required so long as they remain under their allotment? If the member is frugal and able to pocket a few thousand over the whole thing, surely that still saves the GC money since they don't have to pay BGRS?

I have spoken to a number of peers and subordinates by now who will freely admit that they intend to push back the next time their CM tries to get them to do a geographic move, where the headache of dealing with BGRS is an equal or greater consideration affecting that intent than the disruption to their families.
 
Last edited:

kev994

Sr. Member
Subscriber
Reaction score
146
Points
610
Rant incoming, and more geared towards the overall process vice this specific issue since the movers are handled by base transport.

I moved twice in the first part of my career under the old BGRS system, where you met in person with an agent located on base at both ends of the move to handle your claims, etc. They also booked flights and other things like that. You had to fact check them on your own to make sure you weren't getting shortchanged by their poor interpretation of admittedly a fairly convoluted relocation directive, but at least you could justify why the CAF was paying for the service.

I have moved twice now under the new system, and it is truly awful. I won't even be so kind as to call BGRS under the new service model useless, because I think that implies that there's simply no value added. In reality, their role in "facilitating" a move is worse than useless as they are an active hindrance to a successful move.

Twice now I have asked for clarification of an ambiguous part of the relocation directive (although a fairly commonplace situation I'd imagine) via email, and then followed it up with a phone call because the email was not being replied to in a timely manner. And in both cases I eventually received directly conflicting information between the phone rep and the email rep.

I have had multiple claims as part of a move partially or fully rejected because some braindead analyst at BGRS corporate (who I can't speak with to explain the situation) has decided that my expense was not covered, or the receipt didn't meet some arbitrary standard of evidence. In many of these cases it's because the situation slightly deviates from the textbook example they had in mind, so all of the relevant information can't neatly fit into the paint-by-numbers section of their website for a specific type of claim (and they apparently don't read the freeform comments attached to the bottom of the claim which lays it out).

By this point I am a fairly experienced member of the CAF who has attended this rodeo a few times, and who has held a number of positions which require me to sift through DND/CAF directives or other GC legal-ese, and I still run into frustrating roadblocks and confusing situations every move. I can only imagine how frustrating it is for our junior pers (Officer or NCM) trying to make sense of this garbage, especially if they have a complex move involving dependents, pets, multiple vehicles, etc.

I guess ultimately my question about this whole shitshow comes down to: what advantage do we as an organization gain by having this corporate parasite leech funds from the GoC off of every move, just to add a bunch of confusion and stress to the already stressful process of a geographic relocation?

Why can't I take my posting message to my nearest BOR, have a clerk punch in some basic criteria (e.g., distance, sale/rental intentions, # of dependents, etc.) and have the computer return a lump sum estimate of the cost of that move based off of current market rates? Get that amount in advance with the explicit expectation that the member be ready to RFD at their new unit on the date agreed upon by the gaining/losing unit, no receipts required so long as they remain under their allotment? If the member is frugal and able to pocket a few thousand over the whole thing, surely that still saves the GC money since they don't have to pay BGRS?

I have spoken to a number of peers and subordinates by now who will freely admit that they intend to push back the next time their CM tries to get them to do a geographic move, where the headache of dealing with BGRS is an equal or greater consideration affecting that intent than the disruption to their families.
I’ve heard 2 counter-arguments to the idea of the clerk’s doing the moves. 1. Back when this was done every OR interpreted things differently so people were upset that Bloggins got different treatment for the same expense (also apparently the argument for the centralized system vice the reps at the base). 2. We’re short staffed on clerks or whatever they’re called these days, we just don’t have the capacity to take on this task.

I’m still baffled that anyone thinks that if an entire section whose job is to book moving trucks can’t find a company to move HG&E that Cpl Wrench-Turner can pick up the phone and find a company on a day’s notice for the same price and not complete screw him/her self.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,790
Points
1,040
I've had DND move me for thousands of dollars. I've moved myself when I hired Two Men and a Truck to move me. I've had Two Men Without a Truck (or a few buddies) load me at one end and unload me at the other while I drove the Penske truck myself (rented it in the US - much cheaper than U-Haul)

Doing it myself was less stressful then wondering where the semi with six loads on it is on any given day and sure costs a lot less. It might be easier to simply give our folks a few extra days to move and just give them a lump sum payment based on distance and size of family and let them do whatever they want and just pocket the excess. Amazing how smoothly things work for a young pup when he can make a small profit from it.

🍻
 

Pelorus

Member
Reaction score
98
Points
430
I’ve heard 2 counter-arguments to the idea of the clerk’s doing the moves. 1. Back when this was done every OR interpreted things differently so people were upset that Bloggins got different treatment for the same expense (also apparently the argument for the centralized system vice the reps at the base). 2. We’re short staffed on clerks or whatever they’re called these days, we just don’t have the capacity to take on this task.

I've heard the same, but as far as I know both were in the context of BOR clerks essentially filling the role of the full-service BGRS reps under the old system. In that scenario, I can definitely see both points being issues.

But a system wherein a BOR clerk has to simply enter in some basic move data into a program which will automatically spit out a number based off of cost estimates pre-calculated and regularly updated by DCBA or whomever, and then approve the transfer of funds of that magic number into the member's bank account shouldn't be too taxing. The rest would be on the member, basically what FJAG alluded to.

If that added workload would be too much for the uniformed clerks, surely we could hire a couple civvy clerks per base as AS-[X] federal public servants. Again, I'm quite confident it would shake out to less money in the end. From what I saw the NCR is full of civvy clerks augmenting the uniformed pers.
 
Top