Employer support for ES mission involvement

[RiverAux]

Obviously most of our ES missions come from out of the blue, which can sometimes make it difficult for those senior members who work to participate since it could leave their employer in a bind if they left without much notice at all. 

So, how supportive is your employer in regards to you taking off to participate in a mission?  Do they pretty much always let you take off?  Let you go, but give you a bunch of grief about it?  Rarely let you go?  Do they see your CAP membership as a plus? 

What sort of things have you done to promote CAP to your employer so as to increase the chances that they will support you when CAP requests you to participate in a mission? 

[Krapenhoeffer]

Well, I know that WIWG has a bill that is going to be signed by the Governor on 10 Dec. that says that employers have to allow members of CAP time off from work for ES missions, and that employers cannot discriminate against CAP members. Granted, I'm not employed right now, so I should close my mouth...

[Flying Pig]

Obviously most of our ES missions come from out of the blue, which can sometimes make it difficult for those senior members who work to participate since it could leave their employer in a bind if they left without much notice at all. 

So, how supportive is your employer in regards to you taking off to participate in a mission?  Do they pretty much always let you take off?  Let you go, but give you a bunch of grief about it?  Rarely let you go?  Do they see your CAP membership as a plus? 

What sort of things have you done to promote CAP to your employer so as to increase the chances that they will support you when CAP requests you to participate in a mission?

I found ways to make a correlation between CAP and work.  I fly fixed wing and SAR for work, and I fly fixed wing and SAR in CAP. I can fly a 182 or 206 in CAP, and a 206 at work.
My supervisor considers CAP free training that he doesnt have to pay for out of his budget.  Mountain School, CD, DEA Overflight Course, and missions.  Although, I havnt actually tried leaving work for a CAP mission yet.  He can put an actual dollar amount on my CAP flying. 
There was one humorous instance where there was an ELT going off in the area, and my Sq. 182 just happened to be parked next to our Dept. hangar.  The Sgt. said, "Take one of the guys (deputies) in your CAP plane and go shut that thing off."  I told him, "Uh....it doesnt really work that way...."

Obviously my scenario is a little unique, but there it is.  If had had a job completely unrelated to anything CAP did, I think it would be a lot harder for an employer to swallow.  It also helps that I am not in a profit driven industry.

[RADIOMAN015]

Again, we are all hired (whether it be a for profit, non profit or government company/agency) to fill a validated need for our employer.  There's an expectation that employees will generally be at work as scheduled every day, supporting their employers' goals.  Employers for the most part don't like anything that interferes with their employees doing their assigned jobs in a timely manner.

When we as employees start to take too much unscheduled time off, (regardless of regulation, policies, or laws), that can have a detrimental affect on one's career.  However, an occassional single unscheduled day off probably isn't going to cause a big problem for most.   HOWEVER, multiple unscheduled concurrent days off probably would cause an issue.  Many companies & others really are at minimum staffing due to economic and budgetary pressures, and don't have someone else to readily perform all of the absent employees duties.

As far as employers being aware of your CAP ES involvement, probably let them know when you've been employed for awhile but don't really press any time off issues.  Some companies may encourage their employees to participate in non profit organizations, especially if press releases to the media mention the companies' name.     

There's a fair amount of retirees and semi-retirees that are members of CAP, and hopefully, they will be willing to become trained in various ES positions/activities, and will also be available when the ES call comes.
RM       

[PhotogPilot]

I had to put in a neutral, but my in my situation, (major corporation, union member), the ability to take time off is governed by several factors, including amount of advance notice, number of people already off, vacation days available, etc. On 9/11/01, I was working two jobs, in Massachusetts, and both of them told me to take whatever time I needed, and was gone from both jobs for 3 days while I was involved in transport missions between Hanscom AFB and JFK airport. So in that case the level of support was outstanding. Eventually I would like to see some protections written into Federal or Texas Law to include volunteer emergency service (CAP, CG Aux, Volunteer FF, etc) in a law such as FMLA. This would give some protection and unpaid time off.

[arajca]

Most states that have laws allowing volunteers time off for missions, incidents, etc, provide a clause that essential personnel are excluded from the law.

In my case, my boss is on the local SAR team and has taken advantage of CO's law a few times. I have not had cause to yet.

Some employers like to use the number of volunteers they have employed as a PR tool, especially if they grant them time off for missions. It's a good community relations tool.

[321EOD]

Most states that have laws allowing volunteers time off for missions, incidents, etc, provide a clause that essential personnel are excluded from the law.

In my case, my boss is on the local SAR team and has taken advantage of CO's law a few times. I have not had cause to yet.

Some employers like to use the number of volunteers they have employed as a PR tool, especially if they grant them time off for missions. It's a good community relations tool.

My situation is quite "entertaining"......
1. My employer has a specific clause in company policy that allows PAID time off in exceptional circumstances to support volunteer SAR.
2. My immediate supervisor sees my envolvement in CAP as a way for me to "get my jones" (whatever that means...'get my kicks'?)
3. I am salaried so my employer gets LOTS of 'unpaid' hours from me too ;-)
4. One of my staff is an active CAP member too - wow talk about a 'conflict of interest' minefield (for both of us!). However I'm in a position to understand his contribution to the community and CAP. He is also very 'selective' in his requests and validates that trust with always being willing to go the extra mile at work.

Luckily most of my CAP 'clients' arrange for their missions to happen in the evenings and on weekends! (he he....I wish!)

[wuzafuzz]

I'd say my employer is neutral on the issue.  Although we are encouraged to actively participate in the community, it's usually done while flying our company colors or donating to United Way through payroll deductions.  Aside from that I'd say my employer complies with applicable laws and not much more. 

While my supervisor thinks my CAP activities are cool, she doesn't like the idea of surprise time off.  Fortunately I am salaried so I can make time up if I have deadlines to worry about.  That and my immediate supervisor is about 2,000 miles away.   :angel:

[♠SARKID♠]

My employer has basically said "Gosh Dan, I'd like to help ya but I really need you to come in today" every time I've called in for a mission.  But, that's not a big deal anymore.  Krapenhoeffer mentioned that WIWG's bill was going to be signed 10 Dec, but it was expedited to this past Wednesday and we now have mandatory leave for missions.  I also have a nifty pen that the Governor used to sign the bill with 

[RRLE]

Your Wisconsin 'protections' are practically worthless. I read thru the "Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau" and this line is in there:

5. The leave of absence does not unduly disrupt the operations of the employer

From the employee's point of view - do you really want to be on record that your absence does not unduly disrupt the operations of the employer? Just how invaluable do you want to be known to be?

From the employer's point of view, especially small employers, if you have an employee whose absence does not disrupt your operations then why do you employ them?

And guess who gets to decide the disruption the employer, who pays the cost, or the employee?

Wisconsin Assembly Bill 132

[RiverAux]

From the employee's point of view - do you really want to be on record that your absence does not unduly disrupt the operations of the employer? Just how invaluable do you want to be known to be?

I guess no one in the US should ever use any vacation or sick leave since obviously no employer can afford to be without an employee at any time for any reason. 

In the case of Wisconsin, the employee could sue the employer for denying them CAP leave or firing them because of it and it would be up to the jury to decide if it unduly disrupted the employer's operations.

[RRLE]

The issue of vacation time has been brought up with and dealt with in the past. Vacations are planned in advance. Rescue Ronnie takes off at the last minute with no notice or planning. Sick days are there so the sickee doesn't get the rest of the employees sick and so they can recover to be at their best. I never take many sick days but when I do, my employer considers me 'on call' for at least phone support. Rescue Ronnie in the middle of Katrina wracked NOLA is not going to be available to the employer for on call support and that is the difference between 'SAR leave' and vacation/sick days.

The old threat of a law suit is a joke. Check with some experienced lawyers. Employers rarely lose, especially if they don't put the real reason in writing. Proving the 'real' reason for any employment related discrimination is very tough. And who do you think can tell a better story to the jury.

The employee has an almost insurmountable obstacle to overcome. If he alleges his absence did not disrupt the business then he plays into the employers story that his job wasn't necessary. No employer can be forced to employ unnecesary or redudant workers. If he claims his job was critical then he plays into his employers story that his job was critical and his absence disrupted the business. Keep in mind in a court case the employee as the plaintiff presents first. The employer has plenty of opportunity to adjust his presentation to the employees story.

This bill is more 'feel good' for CAPers then it does anything real for job protection.

BTW - the 15 days leave cannot be taken all at once. It is 15 days in a year. The employer can max it at 5 for any one leave.

[sdcapmx]

I think the leave laws for CAP are a step in the right direction.  It baffles me that some employers are so reluctant to let someone go and try to make a difference.  Maybe someday that employer will have  the misfortune of having a fire or need for a volunteer agency and then realize how important we are.  I will be working the issue with our state legislature this year to try to get something in place but I doubt it will happen.  The Chamber of Communists (Commerce) is so strong in our state that pretty much whatever they want they get so it will more than likely die in committee.

[♠SARKID♠]

From the employee's point of view - do you really want to be on record that your absence does not unduly disrupt the operations of the employer? Just how invaluable do you want to be known to be?

I guess no one in the US should ever use any vacation or sick leave since obviously no employer can afford to be without an employee at any time for any reason. 

+1, that's been my standing argument.

This is how I've looked at the "undue disruption" deal, and mind you this only applies to me and my case: there is zero difference in the way that my employer would have to react if I had called in sick or called in for a mission.  He moves some deliveries around to other teams and he moves on.  If he called a mission an undue disruption, it would create some workplace operational paradox and shred space time.

For others, of course, this may not be the case.  You may be the one single IT guy in a company and if you don't show up the business would crash by the 10 o'clock coffee break.  Obviously that's an undue disruption.  It falls back to the same thing we've been doing for years; using our discretion.  If I were that IT guy, I'm going to know that what I do is too important to leave for.

As far as it being "worthless", its not.  The state legislature just spent two years trying to get a bill passed for us.  That's a pretty big way for an employer to realize that what we're doing is pretty d*** important.  My boss was shocked and couldn't believe I actually did all that SAR stuff (apparently he wasn't listening when I told him about it a hundred times before).

[billford1]

My observation from experience is if your Squadron has retiree SM's it's a good idea to promote ES with them. If there's a mission on a week day and they'll agree to be on call it can make a difference even if they aren't at the desired fitness level. Many times missions are turned down because those who want to can't get away from their job or school. If asked what's it all about I give a simple response. It's about getting in the car and going to help someone.  I have had occasion to help injured, stranded people and they were really glad to see us. As much as I want to go if I get a mission call during a week day I usually have to turn it down.