What CAP CAN AND NEEDS to do is get each plane a Multi Service gas card or credit card assigned to it in the name of the Sq Commander or Aircraft Manager and stop with the out of pocket reimbursements. They are already reimbursing us based on current documentation, just use that SAME system to justify expenses on the card. Any fraud would be detected in the same manner as someone attempting to submit a false 108. I personally do not use credit cards, yes, my choice, but I don't. So I don't have a "CAP Only" card. Maybe Im just weird. CAP has been around 65 years, its time we explore this and get it done. Any CAP reimbursable expense should be able to be put on a card, that includes any hotels, meals, etc.. Then the AF reimburses CAP, not the member. Its not going to cause any added work beyond what it takes to sit around at a Wing finance meeting and write out checks and mail them. What about just a Multi Service for fuel on AF missions. That should be a no brainer.
Am I way off base?
Add ground vehicles to this and I'm with you. Floating loans to CAP, Inc. to do anything of substance got old a long, long time ago for me.
I thought that the planes and vans already had credit cards. Or is that just TXWG?
Quote from: jeders on February 04, 2011, 05:52:23 PM
I thought that the planes and vans already had credit cards. Or is that just TXWG?
It's wing-specific. Since wing banker started out as a wing-specific program, we can always hope that National sees what a good thing you have in Texas and then decides to give it to the rest of us.
Okay, you guys can stop laughing now. >:D
QuoteI thought that the planes and vans already had credit cards. Or is that just TXWG?
COWG also has a credit card assigned to each aircraft and vehicle. There are places though, that won't accept the Multi-Service card.
Mike
Quote from: sardak on February 04, 2011, 06:30:18 PM
QuoteI thought that the planes and vans already had credit cards. Or is that just TXWG?
COWG also has a credit card assigned to each aircraft and vehicle. There are places though, that won't accept the Multi-Service card.
Mike
That is true, but most places will. I fly all over the western US with a multi service and have only encountered a few places that dont. And those have been the ones that ONLY accept cash Visa or Mastercard. So why is CAWG behind the 8 ball?
Quote from: NC Hokie on February 04, 2011, 05:51:05 PM
Add ground vehicles to this and I'm with you. Floating loans to CAP, Inc. to do anything of substance got old a long, long time ago for me.
Oh, don'tcha know it!
I just got paid in January for a 108 that was submitted in
Sep '09. Yes, '09. The strange part was that I submitted two 108s at the same, and the other one got paid in less than a month.
It seems there are a number of Wings who have done this.
Why, exactly, does this need to be a "national" solution? Have a problem with your wing, take it up with your wing.
Quote from: Flying Pig on February 04, 2011, 05:39:39 PMAm I way off base?
Nope, not at all. Just to the north side of the airport. 8)
Quote from: JeffDG on February 04, 2011, 08:14:25 PM
It seems there are a number of Wings who have done this.
Why, exactly, does this need to be a "national" solution? Have a problem with your wing, take it up with your wing.
No, it doesnt need to be a National solution, but I cant imagine why any Wing wouldnt want it? My issue is CAWG WONT do it. So taking it up with my Wing seems to be a dead end.
So next time you land after a AFAM call up the Wing Commander and tell him his airplane is out of gas and you can't afford to front the Air Force $200 to fill it up. If all the MP's start doing that they'll figure it out pretty quick. >:D
I can see not putting them in van's where they can be stolen or misused fairly easily, but I can't see asking the MP's and/aircrews to pay for mission fuel and then pray for reimbursement. At very least issue the cards to the IC's so they can take care of it. JMHO
Quote from: Al Sayre on February 04, 2011, 09:26:10 PM
So next time you land after a AFAM call up the Wing Commander and tell him his airplane is out of gas and you can't afford to front the Air Force $200 to fill it up. If all the MP's start doing that they'll figure it out pretty quick. >:D
I can see not putting them in van's where they can be stolen or misused fairly easily, but I can't see asking the MP's and/aircrews to pay for mission fuel and then pray for reimbursement. At very least issue the cards to the IC's so they can take care of it. JMHO
So GTLs are still stuck paying $80 to fill the 15pax because they are more likely to abuse the cards than the pilots? Sounds a bit holier than thou to me.
My wing has credit cards in the aircraft (or open accounts with the FBO's where the planes are stationed). You fly , you get a bill from wing.
On the other hand, most use of ground vehicles is member-sponsored, so I don't see the need.
No one forces anyone to front money for CAP.
Quote from: Eclipse on February 04, 2011, 10:15:20 PM
On the other hand, most use of ground vehicles is member-sponsored, so I don't see the need.
No one forces anyone to front money for CAP.
So, your members are using CAP vehicles for non-CAP purposes? Using a CAP vehicle for a CAP function does not make it member sponsored, but you say members should front the money for that in direct contradiction to your last line.
Quote from: arajca on February 04, 2011, 10:21:28 PM
Quote from: Eclipse on February 04, 2011, 10:15:20 PM
On the other hand, most use of ground vehicles is member-sponsored, so I don't see the need.
No one forces anyone to front money for CAP.
So, your members are using CAP vehicles for non-CAP purposes? Using a CAP vehicle for a CAP function does not make it member sponsored, but you say members should front the money for that in direct contradiction to your last line.
Noooo.... ::) ((*sigh*))
It goes without saying that COV's are only used for CAP business, but that doesn't mean CAP, Inc. is going to pay for that gas. Most vehicle use is non-reimbursible - unit trips, local training, transport of members to official functions, encampments, etc. None of that would be paid for by the respective wing, necessarily.
Whether it is "pass-the-hat" at the time of the ride, fees built into the activity, or unit funds, there's no need to involve wing, or use a wing credit card - just make sure the tank is full when you shut down.
And again, no one forces anyone to incur expenses on behalf of CAP, certainly not if there is a concern about reimbursement or it causes a financial hardship. "No one else will do it, so I had to." does not equal "forced".
It is amazing what people will do when they realize "the other guy" isn't going to pony up anymore.
How about the "If I don't the mission will not get accomplished". BTDT
Why should a member pay for an encampment to use a vehicle?
Quote from: arajca on February 04, 2011, 10:58:03 PM
How about the "If I don't the mission will not get accomplished". BTDT
Then it is time for someone to re-evaluate the mission. Far too many of our members incur cost or effort in a vacuum and then complain about it later. When a few missions start falling by the wayside, things change.
Quote from: arajca on February 04, 2011, 10:58:03 PM
Why should a member pay for an encampment to use a vehicle?
That depends on whether the encampment is using the vehicle for the activity and requested that it be there. Any number of units use their
assigned vehicle to transport cadets to/from the activity. That is a "nice-to-have" for them, but the fuel cost is not the responsibility of the activity. Pass the hat with the cadets who got the ride or look to budgeted unit funds.
If the vehicle is used
during and for the activity with prior approval, then it is reasonable to expect the encampment to cover the cost of that part of the fuel use.
But driving a COV to the activity as your transport vehicle, parking it for the duration, and putting in a reimbursement request? No.
We all have to get there, and most will use a POV with no reimbursement.
Quote from: Flying Pig on February 04, 2011, 05:39:39 PM
What CAP CAN AND NEEDS to do is get each plane a Multi Service gas card or credit card assigned to it in the name of the Sq Commander or Aircraft Manager and stop with the out of pocket reimbursements.
I spent a LOT of of time looking into the AIR Card from MultiService Corp and the DLA recently. I spoke with and exchanged numerous emails with one of their personnel and CAP is on their list of authorized agencies and eligible for Federal/State pricing (but not Military pricing). But there are numerous issues: CAP would pay a pre-negotiated monthly rate for fuel which is significantly higher than the already inflated SS price for 100LL at my home airport. The price for 100LL isn't so good as the military just isn't that big a user of it. Anyway, the wing would have to designate an Accountable Official (AO) to review the monthly statement they would receive for fuel purchases for all the aircraft in the wing (27 or so in our case) and reconcile each individual transaction against a CAPF 108/WMIRS sortie for accuracy - a very time consuming task - then authorize payment which would need to go thru the Finance Committee each time as it would invariably exceed the limit required for Finance Committee approval. USAF doesn't accept Level 3 transaction data on statements for CAP mission reimbursements, so receipts would need to be included (as we do now) on the CAPF 108's - many of which might not be submitted since the member isn't out of pocket on the expense. So, the AO would need to hunt down missing 108's and receipts. The AIR Card could be used only for fuel and lubricants and a few other items (such as Oxygen) but not for lodging which we reimburse for our CD missions. Then there are the potential abuses, inadvertent or intentional, to contend with. Ultimately, there is just way too much workload centralized at the wing level for this to be doable IMHO.
So, individual credit cards issued by a Bank to each unit might be a better solution. That way the unit commander, finance officer and aircraft/vehicle manager can review and manage the mission related expenses for their own unit, pay the statement out of unit funds and collect money from the wing for mission reimbursements. Assuming the member submitting the F108 listed the unit vs themselves (by mistake) as the person to reimburse. And assuming the unit has the financial resources to front the money to the credit card company.
My opinion - it creates a lot more problems than it solves but if you want to try it then feel free to explore this with your Group and Wing FM first. Rob, feel free to PM me and we can chat. -- John
What about P-cards. Lots of organizations are already using these. They're a Visa or MasterCard issued in the name of the primary user. We could account for them using a F108 or WMIRS sortie.
Quote from: NC Hokie on February 04, 2011, 05:51:05 PM
Add ground vehicles to this and I'm with you. Floating loans to CAP, Inc. to do anything of substance got old a long, long time ago for me.
Well that's the way CAP wants it. The more paperwork the better. I know my employer recently went to fleet cards for all the vehicles, each individual has a separate pin # they use so they know who bought the gas, etc. Pretty simple rather than reimbursing each employee submitting a request for gas. Seems to work well since the statement can be sorted by location and individual.
Last time I looked all CAP vehicles & aircraft are owned by the wing anyways (who can reassign at will) so it stands to reason they should be handling the expenses and not the local unit -- BUT when required back bill the unit for appropriate expenses.
RM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on February 05, 2011, 05:07:10 AM
Last time I looked all CAP vehicles & aircraft are owned by the wing anyways (who can reassign at will) so it stands to reason they should be handling the expenses and not the local unit -- BUT when required back bill the unit for appropriate expenses.
The only expenses any unit should be incurring are for fuel used by that unit for non-reimbursable expenses. All major mechanical maintenance, and even most consumables like oil and wipers, at least for the last few years, have been paid for by the USAF.
Rob: The wing CC prior to the present one had the credit cards in hand, ready to issue to the holders of the aircraft and vehicles. Just as the current CC came into office, there was some glitch about the cards(I can't remember what) and they all went into the circular file. The current CC has done absolutely nothing about working the Credit Card issue: you might email him and ask him. Of course, he hasn't done much about anything else having to do with operations, either.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on February 04, 2011, 10:14:34 PM
Quote from: Al Sayre on February 04, 2011, 09:26:10 PM
So next time you land after a AFAM call up the Wing Commander and tell him his airplane is out of gas and you can't afford to front the Air Force $200 to fill it up. If all the MP's start doing that they'll figure it out pretty quick. >:D
I can see not putting them in van's where they can be stolen or misused fairly easily, but I can't see asking the MP's and/aircrews to pay for mission fuel and then pray for reimbursement. At very least issue the cards to the IC's so they can take care of it. JMHO
So GTLs are still stuck paying $80 to fill the 15pax because they are more likely to abuse the cards than the pilots? Sounds a bit holier than thou to me.
Not holier than thou, just easier to have stolen & misused. A lot of different people use the vans, they are generally parked in an unsecure location and anyone with a slim jim can get the credit card with little trouble if it's left in the van. If it's not in the van, it's useless to everyone but the man with the card, and you are right back where you started. Most auto gas cards are billed monthly, so it may be soome time before anyone even notices that it's gone. With the aircraft, they are generally stored in a fairly secure location, hanger or flight line where strangers screwing with an airplane are generally noticed, and the card is only good for airplane fuel. In my wing we get the bill by tail number every week, and users are required to fax in the receipts within 24 hours of using the card. cuts way down on the likelyhood of theft or misuse...
I work for the state of Illinois. I will pause now while everyone stops laughing......OK....The state Department of Corrections has the following system. Unless a vehicle is assigned to a particular person, the vehicle keys and a envelope containing a gas card(Wright Express currently), a Central Management Services Maintenance Card, a toll pass, insurance card, and vehicle inspection/discrepancy sheet are stored at the institution. You sign out the vehicle in the log at the institution and then you are issued the packet and keys. On the packet envelope is space for your name, date out, date in, begin mileage, end mileage, destination/reason and a rate of 1,2,3,4. If you rate a 4 it is driveable, 1 is deadlined under all circumstance and 2,3 allow the vehicle to be driven under limited conditions.
Not saying this could work for CAP but it is one system that is used.
The issue with CAWG and credit cards for aircraft was they were Air BP cards. I still have only seen one Air BP pump in California, and that was at VNY. Gee, go figure. Wing HQ is really close to that.
They were, in fact, Air BP cards and almost all of the airfields in this part of CA are Air BP dealers. Of course, this was over four years ago: should have been sufficient time to negotiate with a multi-service card company!!!!!!!! Doing nothing is usually easier than doing something.
I fly all over CA and rarely see Air BP. Although there is one at Hemet. Chevron wouldnt be a bad deal, but Multi Service seems to be where I can get gas just about anywhere. Even Chevron and Air BP vendors will take the multi service inside the FBO, it just wont work if you slide your card at the pump.
Quote from: Eclipse on February 05, 2011, 05:43:19 AM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on February 05, 2011, 05:07:10 AM
Last time I looked all CAP vehicles & aircraft are owned by the wing anyways (who can reassign at will) so it stands to reason they should be handling the expenses and not the local unit -- BUT when required back bill the unit for appropriate expenses.
The only expenses any unit should be incurring are for fuel used by that unit for non-reimbursable expenses. All major mechanical maintenance, and even most consumables like oil and wipers, at least for the last few years, have been paid for by the USAF.
The member bringing the vehicle for servicing has to pay for it and than put in for reimbursement. Lots of unnecessary paperwork (and more cost to the unit to copy things, mail it in, etc, etc, etc,) to keep the wing administrator fully employed. There's much easier ways to do things. I doubt that when the American Red Cross volunteer is gasing up the response van that they are paying out of pocket for anything ???
Lets face it CAP overall needs to improve their respect for volunteers overall (when compared with other volunteer organizations) >:(
RM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on February 06, 2011, 05:37:01 PMThe member bringing the vehicle for servicing has to pay for it and than put in for reimbursement. Lots of unnecessary paperwork (and more cost to the unit to copy things, mail it in, etc, etc, etc,) to keep the wing administrator fully employed. There's much easier ways to do things. I doubt that when the American Red Cross volunteer is gasing up the response van that they are paying out of pocket for anything ?
That is wing specific.
My wing handles everything but non-emergencies via direct payments, and again
no one is forced to incur these costs.