PERs : All issues questions...2003-2019

[Eye In The Sky]

I think A LOT of the problem with CFPAS isn't CFPAS, its the politics where people are trying to 'situate the estimate' so that the ppl they want promoted/held back are, rather than just writing people up on their performance that year and letting the chips fall where they may.

Mini-boards, unit board, etc etc etc.  Write people up on their performance against their initial PDR and that's that.

 

[jollyjacktar]

It's crap.  You're over or under written rarely or never accurately written to meet the alloted immediates, ready's etc etc.  If the majority of your subordinates performed outstanding, then by all means give them that rating.  I have seen too many times over the years a deserving member getting screwed because there were not enough outstandings to cover everyone. 

 

[captloadie]

Why don't we just get rid of the immediate category all together. You are either ready for promotion, or you are still developing. Nobody gets promoted immediately anymore anyway. Most scrits require x number of immediates before you are even screened in.

 

[Rifleman62]

How about being posted to a new unit and the automatic wipe out of your "good" PERs because you are in a new job and know nothing? How does that influence three immediates or whatever needed for promotion?

 

[RADOPSIGOPACCISOP]

I think A LOT of the problem with CFPAS isn't CFPAS, its the politics where people are trying to 'situate the estimate' so that the ppl they want promoted/held back are, rather than just writing people up on their performance that year and letting the chips fall where they may.

Mini-boards, unit board, etc etc etc.  Write people up on their performance against their initial PDR and that's that.

That works until you realize the next guy wrote his mediocre soldiers up as walking on water and now you've set your star performers back 2 or 3 years in their career because you wanted to stand on principle.

 

[Gunner98]

Think of the wasted time by supervisors, unit ranking boards and career managers for interviews during my 28-year career.  I was promoted twice - from Lt to Capt in the Artillery (in January 1988) and Capt to Major as a HCA (in January 2005). Forget about the preparation of PDRs because unless I initiated them they were rarely completed.

 

[PuckChaser]

I think we've got to keep in mind these are interim measures as part of a larger rebuild of how we evaluate our troops. The measures are being applied to a flawed system, so we get bandaids on the Titanic. Once they get a whole new system together, with some of the time saving measures they've implemented, then we might see more accurate reports of performance. I'm personally a fan of only having 3 promotion recommendation options (No, Developing, Ready), but having the same numbers of PF options to be able to make a distinction between your "good enough" to be promoted, and high fliers.

 

[Ostrozac]

Why don't we just get rid of the immediate category all together. You are either ready for promotion, or you are still developing. Nobody gets promoted immediately anymore anyway. Most scrits require x number of immediates before you are even screened in.

Lately that's been heavily dependant on rank and trade. Some merit boards are so superselective that only near perfect scores across the board (and French, and the right courses) will get a promotion. Some other merit boards have promoted based on ready PERs.

Check out some of the MOSIDs that are Red (officer and NCM both) -- promotion boards tend to be less competitive when the trade has been bleeding experienced manpower.

 

[dapaterson]

Check out some of the MOSIDs that are Red (officer and NCM both) -- promotion boards tend to be less competitive when the trade has been bleeding experienced manpower.

Not the only reason for a trade to be red - new positions can cause that as well, as can rank inversions - for example, some trades want more Sgts than MCpls, which creates lots of pressure to promote MCpls, and can result in promoting based on PERs with lower scores than in other trades.

 

[Tibbson]

Lately that's been heavily dependant on rank and trade. Some merit boards are so superselective that only near perfect scores across the board (and French, and the right courses) will get a promotion. Some other merit boards have promoted based on ready PERs.

Check out some of the MOSIDs that are Red (officer and NCM both) -- promotion boards tend to be less competitive when the trade has been bleeding experienced manpower.

I don't see them as less competitive.  If they need to promote 30 to a certain rank level, they will promote the top 30 presented to the board.  If that is 30 who are "Immediate" then so be it but if they have to dig deeper down the list because of higher then normal releases.  Give it 5 years and those same trades may only be promoting a fraction of those numbers and only those right justified. 

 

[dapaterson]

Boards to not always promote to PML.

As well, the FRP years saw at least one occupation promote to PML post-FRP, only to see PML subsequently reduced (as establishments were adjusted downwards).  The end result was zero promotions for quite a number of years in that occupation, and an increasingly large contingent of folks who could not be promoted; rumour has it that one member topped the merit list four years running; the next year, he slipped down a notch - and that year there was finally a single promotion.

 

[Old EO Tech]

I'd really like to see some RCN examples of MOI PER's with 16 AF's to cover and only using 9 lines...anyone happen too see one of these elusive beasts that the new CANFORGEN references?

 

[Jarnhamar]

I have a serious question about what happens to recruiters, or whomever is responsible for files, when they get lost.

Last month not one but two of my good friends had their applications lost by CFRC and have to start from scratch. 
One of them is a vet who got out of the CF after over a decade of service and multiple tours including Bosnia, Germany and Afghanistan.  After a long chat about the state of the world and the state of the CF he decided to sign up again and serve.
The other guy is very physically fit, very intelligent and a tradesman who wanted to put on a uniform and contribute to the CF 'do his time.

Both files were lost.  If I lose a glove at work I have to pay for it.  If I lose a protected B file or one of those "Exercise Only ROE cards" I can be charged. (and get threatened with the latter all the time)
I don't recall exactly what is in a recruits file but I can take some guesses.  Sensitive personal information, previous places of work and addresses, names of family members and dependents, school transcripts,  Social Insurance Number. I'm sure there is more I'm missing.

So what happens when a file is lost?
Is there an investigation to what happened? Is a big effort made to try and track down the persons lost personal info? Is someone held accountable and gets  it noted on their PDR?  Do lost files just get a shoulder shrug?

 

[DAA]

I have a serious question about what happens to recruiters, or whomever is responsible for files, when they get lost.

So what happens when a file is lost?
Is there an investigation to what happened? Is a big effort made to try and track down the persons lost personal info? Is someone held accountable and gets  it noted on their PDR?  Do lost files just get a shoulder shrug?

:dunno:

 

[George Wallace]

I have a serious question about what happens to recruiters, or whomever is responsible for files, when they get lost.

Last month not one but two of my good friends had their applications lost by CFRC and have to start from scratch. 
One of them is a vet who got out of the CF after over a decade of service and multiple tours including Bosnia, Germany and Afghanistan.  After a long chat about the state of the world and the state of the CF he decided to sign up again and serve.
The other guy is very physically fit, very intelligent and a tradesman who wanted to put on a uniform and contribute to the CF 'do his time.

Both files were lost. ..........

Hopefully they keep photocopies of what they submitted.  If not, advise them to do so the next time, and remember to do so in the future with all their documents and correspondence.

It has been a while since I did Recruiting, but I do remember that some of the file clerks, well at least one, in the CFRC here were/was both lazy and incompetent.  All the good work done by all the Recruiters and other staff in the CFRC was negated by one key person in one key position. 

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Perhaps one of the recruiters monitoring this board can run us through the process and how the file is logged into the system? Our database where I work gives us a file #, assigns an officer to it and requires a "Bring forward" date that reminds you a file is pending. A file may go slightly astray but not far and for to long.

 

[Harris]

A fried of mine worked at the CFRC in Halifax a few years ago and when I mentioned that they had lost one of my soldier's files she gave me the big shoulder shrug and said, "It happens all the time".  When I asked if there were any issues raised with this, she replied to the negative.  Not saying that is the case now, but it certainly was then.

 

[KT56]

Can someone explain to me how PER exemptions work? I have been on parental leave for 9 months of this current fiscal year and my CoC says that I will be getting an PER Exemption this year. Does it just double last years PER so that I should receive the exact same score ?

 

[sidemount]

the post above is still accurate.

Others may have better info but the way I read it is esentially you dont get a score but if you were strong enough to be merited then you get the average of your last 2 PER scores instead of the exemption

 

[McG]

I think A LOT of the problem with CFPAS isn't CFPAS, its the politics where people are trying to 'situate the estimate' so that the ppl they want promoted/held back are, rather than just writing people up on their performance that year and letting the chips fall where they may.

I would have to agree.  I recently heard one CO offer the observation that "despite how open and transparent the PER process is supposed to be, it really is not."  The CFPAS policies and directives (as laid out through the CFPAS help file and annual CANFORGEN) are routinely ignored. 

CFPAS says all PER copies will be destroyed once they have been receipted by the PER processing centre in NDHQ, but I would not be surprised if every unit retains copies until at least the next year's PERs are in Ottawa (and I know examples of units with three years of PERs on file).

CFPAS says that PER potential and rankings are not to be lowered for individuals who are forecasted to component transfer or be promoted, yet I have seen the exact thing come out of unit and formation merit boards.  There was even a CANFORGEN on the topic of too many pers being dropped in score for an anticipated promotion which (often for training injury TCats) does not happen and suddenly a guy is held back in rank another 2 - 3 years while waiting to regenerate the right scores to be selected again.

CFPAS says that previous years' PER scores shall not be a factor in setting the present year's PER score (and the grievance board has upheld this position by rejecting multiple grievance arguments based on prior scores), but these again are items of information that are routinely pulled into unit and formation merit boards.

Here is another one:

It's crap.  You're over or under written rarely or never accurately written to meet the alloted immediates, ready's etc etc.  If the majority of your subordinates performed outstanding, then by all means give them that rating.  I have seen too many times over the years a deserving member getting screwed because there were not enough outstandings to cover everyone.

CFPAS rules expressly prohibit score controls and bell curves.  If what you say is true, then every referenced screwed member would have solid grounds for redress ... though they may have to ATI the ship's PER directions to prove their case.  (That being said, I think flexible score controls are something we may need to consider.  The average individual is above average, and that really dilutes the value of the performance based assessment when weighted against all the check-in-the-box factors considered at a promotion board)

How about being posted to a new unit and the automatic wipe out of your "good" PERs because you are in a new job and know nothing? How does that influence three immediates or whatever needed for promotion?

In theory, one's performance may suffer due to the learning curve associated with a difficult new job.  Potential should not suffer that same effect, and so promotion recommendation (N, D, R, I which are directly derived from potential) should not suffer.  That being said, units should not have a standing practice of punishing the new guy - if such a thing is happening and can be proven, then this is again a solid ground for redress.

Mini-boards, unit board, etc etc etc.  Write people up on their performance against their initial PDR and that's that.

That works until you realize the next guy wrote his mediocre soldiers up as walking on water and now you've set your star performers back 2 or 3 years in their career because you wanted to stand on principle.

And this is why CFPAS needs to be a priority for leadership right to the top in the CAF before it will be fixed.  Nobody wants to be the first guy to stop gaming the system because it will be his subordinates who, at an aggregate level, suffer.