Author Topic: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]  (Read 191780 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online GAP

  • Semper Fi
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 204,970
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,879
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #50 on: June 25, 2008, 17:17:03 »
I am out of my lane here, but given that, is not the PER not only for recognizing effort on the part of the soldier, but on areas he/she need to improve on?  If you were noted as having areas that need improving, why not just improve?

Remember, the person making the evaluation is on the outside looking in.....there's lots of stuff I thought I was doing adequately, sometimes terrifically, only to find out I had it all wrong from the get go.....
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I´m not so sure about the universe

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 177,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,425
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #51 on: June 25, 2008, 17:29:06 »
I want my PER to be re-assessed because I feel like i am better than my PER made me out to be. As it was written, it picked out primarially negitive traits which occured over the course of 2 exercises. It seems silly to accept a negitive PER which hardly credits the soldier for their achievements, and positive contrabutions when you're being ranked amongst your peers. Especially when it has pull regarding competition for taskings, promotins and tours. I simply want to be credited for my successes, and have my training acknowledged, instead of looking like a lazy slob.

Ok this changes the intent of you Grievance then, from "they didn't put a few exercises and tasking on it" to "I do not agree with my PER at all".

Correct or incorrect?  For us to give good advice, you need to give us good facts. 
The only time you have too much gas is when you're on fire.

Offline pte4life

  • Pte4Life No more.
  • New Member
  • **
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #52 on: June 25, 2008, 17:42:56 »
Ok this changes the intent of you Grievance then, from "they didn't put a few exercises and tasking on it" to "I do not agree with my PER at all".

Correct or incorrect?  For us to give good advice, you need to give us good facts. 

 From restructuring the chain of command, and changing from one troop to another, my higher had very little information to assess from. My unit not properly doing their job as stated in the CFPAS where "It is the responsibility of the parent unit to collect and collate all PDRs and other related documents from all other units, detachments or locations where their personnel are/have been employed and incorporate them into the Annual PER." If my unit can't properly do this job, it effects my highers in assessing me. It sucks that the same higher who didnt have access to past PDR's because they were 'lost', didn't use the reiteration which i wrote at his request stating everything i completed, trg, crses, and quals; and i have no idea why he choose not to include any of this information, unless he lost the email, and was too proud to ask for a second copy... or maybe he just forgot about it? I dont know.

It seems to me that if they have more positive information to go off of, and i dont aggressively persue the issue - as a redress for example - then i am most likely to get benificial results. Unless you think something different? I'm more than open to hearing opinions.

Offline pte4life

  • Pte4Life No more.
  • New Member
  • **
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #53 on: June 25, 2008, 17:53:34 »
I am out of my lane here, but given that, is not the PER not only for recognizing effort on the part of the soldier, but on areas he/she need to improve on?  If you were noted as having areas that need improving, why not just improve?

Remember, the person making the evaluation is on the outside looking in.....there's lots of stuff I thought I was doing adequately, sometimes terrifically, only to find out I had it all wrong from the get go.....

Ya the PER is also to report on the soldiers progress over the duratio of an entire FY. Noting on the progress of a soldier over the course of 2 ex's is a faint reflection of what the intent of such a document is to report.

Of course i could just improve, unless what happens in actuality is that when duties are preformed well, there is not documentation or PDR's to reflect that ethic. It's all based on the paper trail, take a look at basic for example, the top rated soldiers are those who get the best marks on their tests. The actual top soldier may be a slight exception, but grades need to be substantiated by evidence. It doesn't matter how well you do your job day to day or in the field if no one takes notice and reports it.

My point is that if there's serious and highly relivant documentation missing from my file - meaning that there is nothing for my highers to reference with regards to progress. If you have one rough ex, even in the case where it the all too common "my mistake, your fault" syndrome, as happened to me. You get a shitty review if there's nothing to counteract that point. Especially if they're newly promoted and haven't worked with you indepth for the entire year. To leave out a received promotion in the area  of 'new qualifications' on a PER is certainly at fault of a slightly overlooking, or failing to note certain aspects of the soldiers progression over the year. I dont think you can effectively argue that very strongly.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 177,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,425
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #54 on: June 25, 2008, 18:02:16 »
As I have never redressed a PER before, I think I should opt out of advice on this subject seeing the reasons and wait for someone who has redressed a PER or dealt with a mbr who has redressed a PER to wade in, as I would simply be speaking out of my lower hole on this issue.

The only time you have too much gas is when you're on fire.

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 427,795
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,390
  • Crewman
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #55 on: June 25, 2008, 18:52:25 »
I want my PER to be re-assessed because I feel like i am better than my PER made me out to be. As it was written, it picked out primarially negitive traits which occured over the course of 2 exercises.

If you really look at what a person may have done throughout a year in Garrison, and on Exercise; the Exercise will usually trump sitting around a hangar sipping a Tims in Garrison, when it comes down to assessing a Soldiers abilities, skills and potential.  I don't want to be condensending, but perhaps the view your superiors have of your attributes and your own view of yourself are at opposite ends of the spectrum.  Perhaps, you may want to reflect some.  It is a possibility that when the chips were down in the Field you did not shine, and many of your peers did.

DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 877,075
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,190
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #56 on: June 25, 2008, 20:44:32 »
If you have negative points on your PER, there should be documentation on various PDRs in your file to prove it was a deficiency which was counseled but not corrected by the member. If you didn't get PDRs, you may be well on your way to having things changed, either formally or informally. How can you really be expected to correct a problem noticed by your supervisor that was big enough for a PER, if you're not told that it was a problem in the first place?

Offline MJP

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 135,605
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,218
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #57 on: June 25, 2008, 22:38:58 »
If you really look at what a person may have done throughout a year in Garrison, and on Exercise; the Exercise will usually trump sitting around a hangar sipping a Tims in Garrison, when it comes down to assessing a Soldiers abilities, skills and potential.  I don't want to be condensending, but perhaps the view your superiors have of your attributes and your own view of yourself are at opposite ends of the spectrum.  Perhaps, you may want to reflect some.  It is a possibility that when the chips were down in the Field you did not shine, and many of your peers did.



I agree...however it sounds like they were basing his PER on a few weekend ex's rather than a large chunk of fulltime tasking.  If I was writing him up I would put more weight on how he/she did over a long term contract rather than base an entire PER on a few weekend Ex's.  IMHO someone didn't do their homework before they wrote the PER.  I have written (as have many others) a good amount of PDRs and PERs without really knowing the soldier.  However I always got a detailed PDR Part 3/4 from the member including their supervisors name if they were from or were out of unit.  I always emailed/called their old supervisor to make sure what I was writing was accurate.

If you have negative points on your PER, there should be documentation on various PDRs in your file to prove it was a deficiency which was counseled but not corrected by the member. If you didn't get PDRs, you may be well on your way to having things changed, either formally or informally. How can you really be expected to correct a problem noticed by your supervisor that was big enough for a PER, if you're not told that it was a problem in the first place?

Exactomondo!

A soldier should never see a point to improve for the first time on a PDR/PER especially if it is a major developing point.  Seeing it on a PER without prior substantiation is so ground for redress and the only person to blame (even if the PER is accurate) is his supervisor.

P4L,

Do exactly what you have already been told here on the forum.  Seek clarification through informal channels at the lowest level possible and try and get it fixed.  If that fails or answers given don't meet what you feel is your performance is  then go through the steps and properly redress your PER.
Hope is not a valid COA

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 427,795
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,390
  • Crewman
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #58 on: June 25, 2008, 22:46:48 »
And the points about finding out about a 'short coming' on the PER that was not mentioned in a PDR are very important.  That is why the PDR System was started; to make the PER System as close to being 'perfect' as possible.  Your supervisors should also have been using the manuals with the 'word pictures' to match the scores.  Your narrative should match what your score was.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline pte4life

  • Pte4Life No more.
  • New Member
  • **
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #59 on: June 26, 2008, 13:10:39 »
Well then i'll let the forum know what happens in the long run. I do not expect to learn much about the subject aside from what i learn through reading and advice and help from members here.

Offline FinClk

  • Scallywag
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 160
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 487
  • Ahoy, the chocalate chip kind.
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #60 on: June 27, 2008, 07:49:45 »
Incidentally, the final authority on PER Greivances was delegated about 2 years ago to Base Commanders (or equivalent) and is no longer DGCFGA. Now I know there was/is a message to this effect however do not recall which series or where it is located.

Online PMedMoe

    is now a flat-faced civvy.... :).

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 245,960
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,997
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #61 on: June 27, 2008, 12:42:32 »
I recently had a PER grievance finalized.  It started in Nov of 2006 when I filed it with my CO and finished with a supplementary PER board on 27 May 2008.  It was supposedly not a "grievance" as my former CO just had the PER rewritten but it still had to go through DMCARM.

The result?  Promotion effective 01 Jan 2007.   ;D  It'll probably be one of those examples of grievances on the Ombudsman page.  ;)
"A good traveler has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving".
~ Lao Tzu~

Offline pte4life

  • Pte4Life No more.
  • New Member
  • **
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #62 on: August 06, 2008, 14:26:06 »
thank you soo much to everyone who has responded so throughly! It is really very much appreciated to see all this support. It puts the wind to my back and the sun on my face. It's been quite demoralizing at my unit, and this gives me the fresh vigor and morale to persue this task with greater vigor.

Ironically, I have been going through informal channels, politely asking to see PDR's and have my PER ammended to reflect my 07FY training, not just the 2 exercises which my superriors primarially focused on. So the ironic part is that they lost my PDR which praised me for my work and included my training for my summer tasking, which it is the units responsibility to attain and hold all PDR's and evaluations so that the member can be properly assessed ( i found this in formal doctrine i think the QR&O's but i do not have the ref in front of me ATM) ; despite this shortcoming, they actually want me to file a redress. Maybe they think I'm bluffing or something.

I mentioned in an email that i would prefer to deal with this informally, however if the deadline approaches and little is being done to ammend the situation i will submit a redress. The responce i receivd from my OC, was more or less "well if you want to have it changed, file a redress." Are we not to try and resolve these things at the lowest level? Oh well. Im a university student, so i certainly know how to write an argument and cite my sources, if you ask me, i shouldn't have any issues winning this case, and will have paper documentation to prove that they were not diligently filling their duties at the unit. Inter rank warfare! Sadly its come to this, but im gettting amped to stick it to the man. ( no offence to any of 'the mans' out there. )

Offline pte4life

  • Pte4Life No more.
  • New Member
  • **
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #63 on: August 06, 2008, 14:28:33 »
my other question, is: i have looked for a specific quote which i can reference that states something to the effect 'without prior couselling on an issue, a member can not be faulted for a shortcoming in a PER.' I have searched quite throughly many ref's in the QR&O's and other gov't sources, but can not find that specific example. Any help would be much appreciated, so that i can ref it in my memo.

Thank you all so much again for your support.

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #64 on: August 06, 2008, 14:32:38 »
politely asking to see PDR's

I hope that from now on, you will ask for, and get, a copy of your PDRs so that this :

Quote
is that they lost my PDR

Doesnt have as much of an impact in any future issues.



Online PMedMoe

    is now a flat-faced civvy.... :).

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 245,960
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,997
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #65 on: August 06, 2008, 14:42:40 »
I hope that from now on, you will ask for, and get, a copy of your PDRs so that this :

Doesnt have as much of an impact in any future issues.

Agreed, you may find statements saying that the unit is responsible, etc, etc but ultimately, you are your own career manager!
"A good traveler has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving".
~ Lao Tzu~

Offline M Feetham

  • Feet
  • Member
  • ****
  • 1,262
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 174
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #66 on: August 06, 2008, 14:53:44 »
For a little perspective from the Naval side of the house. for some  reason the navy decided at some point in time that it would be a wonderful idea to keep divisional notes on it's personnel for the purpose of writing PDR's and PER's. I think I remember from some time way back at the beginning of my career someone saying that technically we are not supposed to do that but I'm not sure. However, div notes are beneficial in that it allows supervisors to keep track of exercises, deployments, shortcomings and exeplary perfromance of it's members. We also keep copies of PDR's and PER's with the dive notes. this allows more accurate tracking of a members performance thruout the year. On the members side however, for myself, I always keep a file of all evaluations/letters of appreciation and my own set of divnotes on myself. This means that come PER season I am able to give my supervisor an accurate accounting of my years perfomance. I always advise my subordinates to maintain some sort of record for themselves that may be submitted for use on request. All in all it works fairly well and just like someone stated earlier, it is your career, the more you keep track of it yourself, the better off you will be in the event that you do feel the need to redress a PDR or PER.
Hope what I have said makes some sort of sense to you
FEET
"Good, Bad, I'm the guy with the gun"

Army of Darkness

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #67 on: August 06, 2008, 15:00:45 »
div notes are beneficial in that it allows supervisors to keep track of exercises, deployments, shortcomings and exeplary perfromance of it's members.

Thats exactly what the PDR system is for. Theres no need for a seperate system to keep track of these things when a part 5 PDR can be produced for these things. PDRs are not just a quarterly instrument.

Like you said, each member should keep a record for him/herself of everything that they do for the year. My subordinates all do and when it comes time for a PDR / PER i use it to make sure nothing was missed in the previous PDRs.


Offline BernDawg

  • Wood Butcher
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 11,675
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 969
  • Retired... workin' harder than ever!
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #68 on: August 06, 2008, 16:41:36 »
Yup.  Keep a log of sorts.  There's nothing more irritating for a supervisor than to receive a part3/4 with 3 lines on it.
"We can't all be heroes... because someone has to sit on the curb and clap as they go by."  Will Rogers
Someone has to be last.  At least if it's me I know where all the assholes are.

Offline MARS

  • Mentor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 54,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 768
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #69 on: August 06, 2008, 17:31:04 »
Quote
for some  reason the navy decided at some point in time that it would be a wonderful idea to keep divisional notes on it's personnel for the purpose of writing PDR's and PER's.

The Canadian Navy adopted this (and the Divisional System as a whole) from the Royal Navy.  It was reinforced following the release of the Mainguy Report.

http://www.navalandmilitarymuseum.org/resource_pages/controversies/mainguy.pdf

I can't remember when the Guide to the Divisional System was created, but the latest version was signed in 2001, and states, in part:

Quote
The Divisional system, which is unique to the Navy, provides a framework for sound leadership for supervisors, be they Officers or Non-Commissioned Members (NCMs), of the Regular and Reserve Forces.

Here is the link, albeit to the DIN:

http://navy.dwan.dnd.ca/english/refs/pubs/divguide/intro.asp

I don't know how unique it actually is...perhaps it was a unique system at one time...I don't know if the army/air force use it or not.  Perhaps a "mutiny" is not something that ever occurs in the army/air force, and "technically" (according the Report) we never had a "mutiny" either.  I can understand why such a thing might happen on a ship, in crappy conditions, in the middle of the ocean with no other effective recourse if the Ship's Company should disagree with the Course Of Action decided on by the Captain. Regardless, the failure in leadership circa the Report is clear indication the Navy did not, historically, do a very good job looking out for the welfare and morale of our sailors. However, the use of divisional notes is a mandatory practice in the Navy.  I have probably had a half dozen PERs overturned/rewritten (on behalf of subordinates) owing to the lack of Divisional Notes - that is a no-brainer when it happens, which is far too often.  I actually get a little giddy when I see that coming - serves the Divisional Officer right for doing such a disservice.

Quote
think I remember from some time way back at the beginning of my career someone saying that technically we are not supposed to do that but I'm not sure.

As for someone debating whether div notes are legal or not, here is another excerpt from the Guide to the Divisional System:

Quote
•  The Divisional Officer’s Notes Sheets (DIVNOTES) (Annex B) allow for a continuous Record of Performance from which assessments may be compiled. They are used for recording personal concerns if they have had a detrimental effect on performance, or for recurring requests, all of which may have a bearing on the member’s performance or employment. Letters of appreciation or displeasure are to be noted. DO and DCPO are reminded that members can have their DIVNOTES in accordance with Access to Information regulations.  It reduces staff work and hastens the provision of DIVNOTES if the members now access their DIVNOTES through an informal request to the Ship’s Office. Persons releasing the DIVNOTES must ensure that the intent of the Privacy Act is respected, checking that the DIVNOTES contain no names or reference to third parties (i.e. persons other than the member to whom the DIVNOTES pertain).

DIVNOTES are to be retained by the Divisional Officer.  If the member (to whom the DIVNOTES pertain) is posted, the records are to be sealed, dated and sent with the UPR to the new unit.  These records are to be opened only with the new Commanding Officers approval.  If a member is posted outside CMS, the DIVNOTES will remain in the Formation.  The responsibility to ensure that these records are removed from the member’s permanent file should fall within the authority of the individual’s Admin Officer.

Since DIVNOTES are considered a “temporary document”, the records in question are not placed on the PERMIS system.  However, DIVNOTES are to be retained for five years after the last administrative action.  If a member is released before the five years are up, the DIVNOTES are to be forwarded to the appropriate Release Section and shall be held for five years from the date of the last administrative action.   

The Divisional System tradition of having personnel records updated and performance assessed every four months has been replaced by the CFPAS feedback every six months. 

Personally, I (and everyone I know) issues PDR feedback sessions every quarter.  Six months is a long time between formal feedback sessions. 

Quote
Theres no need for a seperate system to keep track of these things when a part 5 PDR can be produced for these things

Agreed, Section 5 does include what is captured in Divisional Notes, however, when I write Section 5 I am summarizing from pages and pages of divisional notes.  I write quantitative assessments every few days - weekly at most.  So by the time it comes for the quarterly interview, I have 6 or 7 pages of notes to condense into a comprehensive and succinct review of the member’s performance to date.

/rant begins/
What does drive me nuts are supervisors who do not issue a Section 3/4 - they simply write from the div notes and issue Section 5.  UNSAT.  I see this too often - perhaps because we use div notes, I don't know.  Section 3/4 is to be issued a minimum of 24 hours before the interview - the supervisor is supposed to check what the member has identified as having "accomplished" against the div notes - PRIOR to section 5 being written.  Too often this is not done in my experience.  I actually issue section 3/4 at the start of the reporting year and direct my subordinates to keep it up-to-date throughout.
/rant complete/
"Managers do things right; Leaders do the right thing"

Offline pte4life

  • Pte4Life No more.
  • New Member
  • **
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #70 on: August 06, 2008, 17:58:52 »
Thank you all for your input, I really need the ref for:

 i have looked for a specific quote which i can reference that states something to the effect 'without prior couselling on an issue, a member can not be faulted for a shortcoming in a PER.' I have searched quite throughly many ref's in the QR&O's and other gov't sources, but can not find that specific example. Any help would be much appreciated, so that i can ref it in my memo.

A HUGE thank you for anyone who can dig this up for me... i cant find it .

Offline pte4life

  • Pte4Life No more.
  • New Member
  • **
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 26
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #71 on: August 06, 2008, 18:03:35 »
these are my REFs BTW. If there is anything else that may be approperate i would appreciate it!

a. CF Grievance Manual; May 2007
b. CFAO 19-32 Redress of Grievance
c. CFPAS (Canadian Forces Personnel Appraisal System) Appendix
d. DOAD 5019-4 Remedial Measures
e. DAOD 5050-1 Canadian Forces Personnel Records of the Director General   
     Recruiting and Military Careers and the Director Human Resources
     Information Management, and Service Estate Records of the Judge Advocate
     General

Offline Greymatters

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 15,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,571
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #72 on: August 06, 2008, 18:28:35 »
This isnt much, but its a starting point:

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/Reports/mmcc/Changes/hrm_e.asp#personnel

CHAPTER 4 — HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ISSUES

Key points:

"The Personnel Evaluation Report (PER) is the key document used by promotion boards to determine an individual's merit list standing and thus the possibility of promotion, as well as suitability for further terms of service. Its quality and accuracy are therefore very important."

"The CFPAS DAOD places responsibility for submission of PERs with the member's commanding officer, who must ensure that all required information concerning the performance and potential of the member during the reporting period is incorporated, that all PERs are complete, and that they are submitted properly and on time."


And this article here:

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/Community/MapleLeaf/article_e.asp?id=3078

Understanding the current personnel appraisal system by Capt P. D. Beatty

"The PDR process incorporates two feedback sessions during the reporting period designed to review the member's performance—one at the mid-point of the reporting period, the second at the end of the reporting period, concurrent with the PER interview. While a member should be counselled if, in the opinion of their chain of command, the level of performance or potential falls below acceptable standards, there is no CFPAS requirement to counsel the member if their demonstrated performance and potential remain above the required standard, even if the level of performance is below the previous year’s."

Offline MARS

  • Mentor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 54,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 768
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #73 on: August 06, 2008, 18:33:50 »
pte4life,

did you get the PM I sent you a few minutes ago?

MARS
"Managers do things right; Leaders do the right thing"

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 456,210
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,074
Re: Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]
« Reply #74 on: August 07, 2008, 09:18:13 »
...
I don't know how unique it actually is...perhaps it was a unique system at one time...I don't know if the army/air force use it or not.  Perhaps a "mutiny" is not something that ever occurs in the army/air force, and "technically" (according the Report) we never had a "mutiny" either.  I
...

:warstory:

Going back nearly half a century, the platoon commander's notebook - with information about the circumstances and performance of each NCO and soldier - was maintained at least as well as the platoon commander's weapon and it was inspected just as often.

Confidential Reports (for NCOs, only - the precursors of PERs) had to be substantiated by the platoon commander's notebook. It was also an essential tool for recommending private soldiers for e.g. junior NCO course. I can, personally, vouch for the fact that company commanders went into the CO's semi-annual junior NCO course selection board (Ottawa was not, in any way, involved in really important career decisions like who got to go on that all important course) armed with pages from their platoon commanders' notebooks to support their recommendations. How well we kept those books had a very real, direct and visible impact on the careers of our soldiers.

The rest of your points are well taken.
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"