- Reaction score
- 2,479
- Points
- 1,190
Eye In The Sky said:Disagree.
http://mgerc-ceegm.gc.ca/cs-sc/2013-104-eng.html
http://mgerc-ceegm.gc.ca/cs-sc/2013-103-eng.html
And there goes the last bit of productiveness I had left... >
Eye In The Sky said:Disagree.
http://mgerc-ceegm.gc.ca/cs-sc/2013-104-eng.html
http://mgerc-ceegm.gc.ca/cs-sc/2013-103-eng.html
MCG said:So, you PERs used the potential narrative (for those who get one) as an extension of the performance narrative?
Lumber said:Even the few Immediate I saw which had 15/16 Mastered AFs (there may have been one with 16/16 but I never saw it) managed to describe them all using 16 lines.
Technically, we do that (for NCMs at all appointments/ranks and Officers at some ranks), which is why when people are promoted without the requisite courses formally required for that promotion, they are designated as Acting Lacking and the promotion is not substantive until such time as those courses are completed. If an AL goes on the course and fails it, or declines the course for personal reasons, an AR is supposed to be done with the probable outcome being loss of the promotion. For those who attend the career course(s) prior to promotion, the course report is supposed to be part of the National Merit board and have influence on the national ranking but, at least in my trade, the course reports have become so generic that they are pointless for that purpose.Jarnhamar said:Maybe it's time we stopped basing promotions off arbitrary assessments, vague examples of performance and the all powerful boys club and start actually testing people to see if they possess the academics, experience and job skill to be promoted.
Jarnhamar said:I can only speak for the infantry but we get promoted if we have the required courses, required time in, and merit high enough with the boys.
What I'm talking about is taking all the members in line for a potential promotion, sitting them in a room, and giving them an exam tailored to their job. I'm not talking about giving people points for speaking french but for knowing the 17 steps of battle proceedure. What's involved in a section attack. Procedure for arresting someone etc..
Kind of like how the Americans do it to promote people. Promote someone because they scored a 98% on their exam for the rank of Sgt not because so and so is a good dude and supports the mess.
MCG said:As it should be. I assume then that you intended to write "9 lines" in here:
sidemount said:no kidding, got guys coming to the range, given 20 rounds to zero and then expected to fire PWT 1,2, and 3.....
.
.
Shouldn't be on the PER especially when the member has no control over it.
MCG said:PWT scores should have a box to be entered on the PER.
Eye In The Sky said:In our community, all aircrew do C7 and 9mm. As well as CBRN, FA,Nav, comms, and a whole other pile of readiness and currency requirements that are common to all in addition to our MOSID specific requirements.
There is already plenty to be captured in a PER, now with the new writing guidance NONE of it is captured in annual assessments.