5D Release

[aesop081]

  All this was the result of a one bad evaluation by a single instructor,

This is blatantly false. I have been an instructor myself. It takes nothing short of a series of events to kick someone out and there is an entire process to evaluate action to be taken.

who has the intelligence to realize this is unacceptable, and is willing to help me.

Because you say it is unacceptable, it does not make it so.

I find it hard to believe the entire institution of the Canadian Forces is this full of crap.

Funny how so many people, each year, manage to graduate BMQ and go on to full careers. Yes, you did not make it so, obviosuly, the CF is full of crap.

 

[the 48th regulator]

And with that, our show comes to a close.

dileas

tess

milnet.ca staff

rancing:

 

[cwurts]

My thread was locked before I had the opportunity to respond to the replies.


Birhard:

It is a fact.  The entire story presented to the PRB was that I failed morning inspection,
(both the initial test and the retest), and there were several written warnings for such
things as "forgetting to bring equipment" and "leaving quarters in a mess".  These written
warnings were received a few times by all recruits.  The PRB told me they received
information about me from the instructors, but nothing was documented on paper other than the
written warnings and the morning inspection failure.  If there is an "entire story" beyond
this, it is being kept from me as well.
I am ready for any questions you have to ask.

Good2Golf:

A failure of the morning inspection test and the retest is sufficient grounds to request a
PRB.  It is unfair of you to assume that because the PRB decision was so drastic, there must
be more that I'm not telling you.  The problem is, there wasn't.  I am being barred from the
CF based solely on the one item failure, and a few minor warnings.

medicineman:

I was going to respond to you, but then realized I couldn't do it without stooping to your
level.  Nothing you said in those three paragraphs had any value.  Your general message is:
recruits are messed up, and instructors are ideal judges of character.

 

[Good2Golf]

Good2Golf:

A failure of the morning inspection test and the retest is sufficient grounds to request a
PRB.  It is unfair of you to assume that because the PRB decision was so drastic, there must
be more that I'm not telling you.  The problem is, there wasn't.  I am being barred from the
CF based solely on the one item failure, and a few minor warnings.

Ah, so it WASN'T just a failed morning inspection (which now includes having failed a re-test as well) that led to your PRB.  It was also numerous written warnings for performance shortcomings.

So you now acknowledge that the PRB considered, amongst other things:

1) a failed morning inspection;
2) a failed inspection re-test;
3) a written warning for "forgetting to bring equipment"; and
4) a written warning for "leaving quarters in a mess".

That's now at least four (4) things, when you first said there was only the single item that led to your PRB.  This is information you did not present in the previous post.

My previous statement about your not providing all the details of your PRB stands, and your charges of my being "unfair" quoted above are unfounded.


Regards
G2G

 

[medicineman]

medicineman:

I was going to respond to you, but then realized I couldn't do it without stooping to your
level.  Nothing you said in those three paragraphs had any value.  Your general message is:
recruits are messed up, and instructors are ideal judges of character.

I'd suggest you google "Cluster B Personality Traits and Disorders" and play "Tick the Boxes That Apply".

My general message was simple - if you think that you yourself are the only person being "picked on" in Recruit School , and that the instructors are all wrong and you're the only one right, the problem, as a general rule of thumb, stares back at you everytime you brush your teeth.

Since myself and a number of other folks here have forgotten more about this stuff than you know and just by the way you reacted, I'd have to say most of us were on the right track.  But hey, I was only doing this for 20 something years - I was going to say likely longer than you've been on the planet, but since you haven't bothered filling your profile in, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

MM

Edit to add - if you think we're being really mean to you, there is a report to mod button - just like out in the real world, I'm always happy to help people lay a complaint against me if they feel the need.

Regards.

 

[aesop081]

The entire story presented to the PRB

But you left out quite a bit of the story when you first posted here.

(both the initial test and the retest),

That alone is grounds to have your continuation reviewed.

and there were several written warnings for such
things as "forgetting to bring equipment" and "leaving quarters in a mess".

Why did you not mention this before. It is relevant information.

These written
warnings were received a few times by all recruits.

It does not matter that they were received by other recruits as well. These warnings were received by you. When the PRB looked at your overall performance on the course, these warnings were looked at along with your inability to pass inspection. In other words, it added up.

but nothing was documented on paper

Your instructors were certainly interviewed as part of the PRB process and what they would have said is recorded in the minutes of the PRB. Their professional assessment of your performance and potential to complete the course is relevant and important to the officer conducting the PRB.



 

It is unfair of you to assume that because the PRB decision was so drastic, there must
be more that I'm not telling you.

There was more than you told us in your initial post. The inspection alone may have triggered the PRB but it was not the only factor in its result.

I am being barred from the
CF based solely on the one item failure, and a few minor warnings.

So it is based on several things. You are not being "barred" from the CF. You were allowed in and failed to meet the required performance standards.

I remain certain that there is more to this story than you are telling us.

 

[vonGarvin]

I missed your first thread, and it's not my intention to get into the details surrounding your PRB or release.  Instead, I can talk about policy.  At least for Army courses.  They are governed by something called "LFCO 24-08 Individual Training and Education Policies and Procedures".  This is quite clear on the policies for courses conducted by the Canadian Army.  Annex I gets into progress review procedures, and for your information (and everyone else's).  According to this annex, you can be removed from training for a number of reasons:
Unacceptable Performance.  This is not only academic, but also in other performance (eg: integrity, etc).  So, people who fail various performance checks (tests) could go to PRB, along with people who have failed to respond to final warnings from the training company OC for deficiencies in their general performance (eg: being late, poor inspections, not responding to direction, etc)
Medical.  If you are injured or sick and unable to continue training, you can be removed from training.
Voluntary Withdrawal.  Candidates have the option to self-elect to quit a course; however, the decision to be removed from training rests with the commandant.  As it states in the LFCO:  "As a matter of policy, voluntary withdrawals from training are not accepted."  That is the first sentence.
Disciplinary Issues.  These of course are dealt with through the Code of Service Discipline; however, if they affect your performance on course (eg: punching out a fellow candidate, or getting a DUI on a driver course), then you could once again meet the warning system and/or be removed from training.

What is important to note about the warning system is this line from the LFCO:

Any student whose performance or behaviour is a serious detriment to himself/herself or the course will be immediately placed on Final Warning.  Under exceptional circumstances, where a student is responsible for cheating or plagiarism, a gross error in the field, or during off duty hours, the Commandant may immediately remove the student from training.

So, now that how you get removed from training is clear, let's talk about the recommendations that the CO is mandated to make to the member's file if he or she is removed from training.  They are as follows:

release from the CF;
occupation transfer;
if an officer cadet, consideration for change to NCM status;
recourse;
for students attending courses other than officer phase or QL3 training, the following must also be considered and the decision included in the course report narrative:
the conditions that must be satisfied before the student may be recoursed,
any restriction that the unit may consider for the student's employment,

As the former Chief Standards Officer at a training school, I did see one case in which a candidate was removed from training for Performance in that he had a poor attitude and was negatively affecting the course.  He was recommended to be released from the CF. 

But, in short, I really don't care why you were removed from training, or what the recommendations were for you.  I just wanted to show you what the procedures are for a training institution in the Canadian Army.  Please note that the CO only makes a recommendation.  It's up to your unit, branch or other institution to initiate the release process, and if you feel that you were treated unfairly, then I would offer that you STFU about it on here, and submit a redress of grievance.  Do some research, because the process is clearly outlines somewhere on the interwebz.

I wish you luck

 

[OldSolduer]

Having been a BMOQ instructor (the principles of training and evaluation are the same as for BMQ), I have a very hard time believing that a single morning inspection failure resulted in a PRB.  I had one candidate released under a 5D and I can assure you it was for far more than a single inspection failure.  I think there is more to this than you are portraying.

Regards
G2G

Agreed. I'm a former instructor from CFRS Cornwallis and the PPCLI Battle School. It damn near took an act of Parliament to recourse someone, let alone release them.
Your story does not ring true. I would love to see your recruit file.

 

[HItorMiss]

As a current instructor at CFLRS I can weigh fairly confidently here.

Failing the Pl Comds Inspection (and that is what you had to fail in order to get a PO Failure and a retest) is simply not enough. You require 3 PO failures before a PRB is launched. You had 2 ( Inspection and retest) What is likely is that you had at least one more PO failure ( First Aid, MK,MR,Topo etc) to get the PRB.

When your file sat the PRB you also very very likely had a long case of Counsellings sitting against you as well as many Note to Files. All of which indicated a very sub standard recruit with little chance of passing BMQ to the standard required.

I will also tell you that YES the word of one serving Instructor should be taken that over a recruits, we are the ones with the experience and training and we have a vast amount of resources at our disposal to make our judgments on, including the individual feedback of other instructors. More then once I have had a fellow instructor from a separate course come and evaluate one of my problem students just so I can get the feedback on wethere I am being to hard on someone and finding fault where there is
none, 99-100 I am bang on in my assessment of the candidate and on the 100 time I simple re look at my files and approach.

I would like to say I feel bad that you didn't pass but from what I can read and see between the lines. The reality is you would not have made it and you were stopped at just the right level before something bad occurred or tax dollars were wasted.


EDIT: Spelling, Grammar and Clarity

 

[Grunt_031]

Things have also changed for recruiting from over the last five years. The CF is taking only the best that is available.  Your record from previous service, albeit a major factor, it is one of many. I think they also looked at what you have done in the last five years to improve yourself, correct any of the deficiencies you had on BMQ and how you would be an asset to the CF in the future. Your record, as you described it, since leaving the CF is a poor performer that blames others instead.

 

[chrisf]

Agreed. I'm a former instructor from CFRS Cornwallis and the PPCLI Battle School. It damn near took an act of Parliament to recourse someone, let alone release them.

Paperwork, paperwork, paperwork... it's hard enough to process a voluntary RTU or voluntary release, let alone a training failure etc....

Even if a student arrives at a PRB, more often then not, the PRB recommends retesting as opposed to a recourse, RTU, or release.... particularly if there's even the slightest doubt raised in the paperwork in the students file, they will typically find in favor of continuing with the course (And/or a retest if requried)... paperwork has to be meticulous to get somone off the course even if there's not the slightest doubt they shouldn't be there... a case has to be built over time, and said case typically doesn't appear instantly...

 

[OldSolduer]

Paperwork, paperwork, paperwork... it's hard enough to process a voluntary RTU or voluntary release, let alone a training failure etc....

Even if a student arrives at a PRB, more often then not, the PRB recommends retesting as opposed to a recourse, RTU, or release.... particularly if there's even the slightest doubt raised in the paperwork in the students file, they will typically find in favor of continuing with the course (And/or a retest if requried)... paperwork has to be meticulous to get somone off the course even if there's not the slightest doubt they shouldn't be there... a case has to be built over time, and said case typically doesn't appear instantly...

This is true, but once in a blue moon a case can appear instantly - not often - but sometimes.

 

[chrisf]

This is true, but once in a blue moon a case can appear instantly - not often - but sometimes.

That's why I said typically, I can think of three off the top of my head... four or more if you count the guy with multiple personalities...

 

[cwurts]

The post I made here, and the responses I received, are a very close description of what I went through in basic training.  The instructors would point out endless flaws and mistakes, some were true, some were unfounded; but if I so much as suggest that they might be wrong, I get a backlash of insults and accusations in defense of the instructors.  As someone pointed out, I have a right to file a redress of grievance.  I have done that, and I am getting bashed for it.  The level of hostility I am receiving here is unnecessary, and inappropriate, and I say that with sincerity.  I also don't appreciate the backwards reasoning that if a PRB or CO decision was made, my mistakes must have been extremely serious.  If you believe that the institution is flawless, there is no way a redress could be done without bias.

My BMQ Summary of Results at the time I was taken off training shows that I only have two PO failures.  If a PRB requires 3, then there was a violation of protocol.

Concerning the paperwork, the PRB was requested during week 7 of BMQ, and conducted the same week.  After the PRB made their decision, I immediately asked for a redress.  I spoke to an assisting officer about it, then I was sent back to my platoon, and my current training status was not fully explained to me.  In week 8, one of the instructors sent me to PAT platoon, where I waited to hear about the status of my redress.  Nothing happened, and I was sent home at the end of the 13 weeks.

I will also tell you that YES the word of one serving Instructor should be taken that over a recruits

Let's make something perfectly clear.  When a recruit comes to you and says an instructor is wrongly criticizing them, you hear them out first - you don't tell them they are wrong because the instructor has more experience.

from what I can read and see between the lines. The reality is you would not have made it and you were stopped at just the right level before something bad occurred or tax dollars were wasted.

There it is:  you are reading between the lines, but you can't do that if you are going to get an accurate picture of what's going on.  I want your kinds of posts to stop.  They are very offensive, and are clouding the issue. <b>I was released from the CF.  I believe the instructors and PRB were wrong to make the decisions they made.  That statement does not need to be defended against.  Many people here seem to agree that a PO failure on morning inspection (test and retest) is not serious enough to warrant a release from the CF.  No, there are not any additional facts I am omitting.  The reasons for my release are well-documented, and if there is information missing, it is hidden from me also.  The real problem is that the release item 5d is preventing me from re-enrolling, so get this:

Because an instructor was unsatisfied with the arrangement and tidiness levels of my bed and closet space, I am incapable of contributing ANY kind of valuable service within the Canadian Forces.  Case closed.
This is a ridiculous statement, but that's the opinion that the IA is upholding.  For the good of the CF, I hope the Final Authority has more sense. 
</b>

 

[The Bread Guy]

Since we've done the back-and-forth dance on this more than once, methinks it's time for a lock.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[exfirefighter]

I was in the CF reserves when I was seventeen, I made it though to 7 a half weeks, was then released as 5d for being to immature.  Now I have applied again at age 37 passed cfat, medical,etc. all but the interview. Got a call this morning saying b/c I was 5D they are putting the recruitment process on hold until a waiver is put though to a csf?( the Recruiter spoke quickly, so unsure if acronym is correct). When asked how long it would take and if it is still possible to be hired, the recruiter stated up to and over a year for the 5d to be seen by this person and most do not turn out favorable!  So what can I do from here to show I've matured immeasurably since then and have a favorable outcome?

 

[mariomike]

There are a few topics on 5D release you may find helpful:
http://www.google.com/cse?cx=001303416948774225061%3Aqhcx9pz3dku&ie=UTF-8&q=5D&sa=Search&siteurl=www.google.com%2Fcse%2Fhome%3Fcx%3D001303416948774225061%3Aqhcx9pz3dku&ref=#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=5D&gsc.page=1

 

[exfirefighter]

Who is this CSF guy? May I contact him to explain my situation? I've put so much effort in to training and getting prepared for this, it is unbelievably disheartening to have my immature actions as a seventeen year old still having such ramifications in this situation twenty years later!!  Someone also said in the post links you gave me that they when through an ombudsman, do you recommend this course of action or will this make waves?  I just don't want to give up, after I've prepared myself and family for this for so long now!

 

[agc]

Yeah, you heard wrong.  That guy is Gen Natynczyk.  I probably wouldn't call.  Let the chain of command do its work.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

The 'CSF' you did indeed mishear. It's CDS (Chief of Defence Staff), as previously pointed out, ole Uncle Walt, who can grant a waiver.

Just wait and see I'm afraid. Going to work in a leper colony in India to prove your maturity isn't going to help them make their minds up.