PERs : All issues questions...2003-2019

[BinRat55]

I had a grand total of 0 PDRs written on me in my 15 years and I do not feel cheated or that my supervisors did a bad job of mentoring me. They just had a different approach.

Need I say more?

 

[BinRat55]

PDRs are not used for career advancement (read promotion boards).  ....  PDRs are a lazy way to recognize your people.

 

[BinRat55]

I have two PDRs in 5 years and I don't feel slighted in the least.  I have always known exactly where I stood because I have been told what to improve through verbal feedback, usually this feedback is in real time and relevant.  That is wayyyyyyyy more important than some useless piece of paper that tries to encapsulate the last 3-5 months of my work.  IMHO that is way to late to be conducting feedback.  I think the lazy CoCs are the ones that depend on the PDR as the prime piece of feedback rather than on the spot mentoring. 

I certainly don't think of my CoC as lazy as some have alluded to on the thread.  They are hard working folks that realize that there is a time and place for some administration and react accordingly.

 

[TCM621]

I'm not I get what you mean by those who don't use the PDR system? Doesn't everybody use the PDR/PER system? Even if they didn't use PDR, they still submit PERs at the end of the year. If you gave a member an ES on say, Working with Others, and he grieves it saying he derserved a Mastered, he has to have verifiable examples of him Working with Others that fit the word picture for Mastered. Even if he provides examples, his supervisors can present their own representations as to why the example better fits the word picture for ES and not M.

Maybe I just don't understand your point?  If so, sorry :facepalm:

This is the real issue. If a supervisor does not issue PDRs what document does he have to back up his version of events? If you don't give him an initial PDR with expectations based on the members position how do you argue that he did or didn't meet or exceed a standard? There must be a standard set for one to exceed it.

As other have said, there are much bigger problems with the system than whether or not someone gets a PDR. However, you personally may not be able to stop the other ones but you can make sure your subordinates recieved what they are entitled to and is mandated for you to give.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I can't trivialize it that easily. Are promotions, postings, PD etc being severly or even moderately handicapped by any real or perceived CFPAS issues? Maybe not severely, but yes I beleive so. How many techs are being promoted way too early these days? It's a conversation I have (sadly) had numerous times. I have a really good MCpl. He's going places, this guy. Still has things to learn, but man he's a great MCpl. I write PDRs / PERs as such. Now, the supervisor next door, she has a good MCpl too. In my opinion (and others) not quite as good as my MCpl. She writes HER MCpl higher that I do mine. HER CoC backs it. How do I fight that? By inflating my MCpl's PER so that his is better once again. We end up with leaders newly promoted in a bad position because they have little to no experience and knowledge!

All ficticious, of course but inflating the PERs of those who rightfully deserve to be on top in order to GET them on top is genuinely FLAWED. We get it right much of the time, but eventually there will be no room left. I have seen (time and time again - way too much now) first year Cpls actually redressing a PER because they never went out READY!!! First PER. Why? Because of the CoC that never properly managed expectations through CFPAS (PDRs) allowing that Cpl to think their s*** don't stink because anothe young Cpl's CoC was really gone on them.

Flawed a little is still flawed.

An good, and IMO, realistic post of the reality of our CFPAS system. 

I think the 'failed to manage the mbr's expectation' is part of a possible leadership issue.  It is also (again, IMO) part of the newer 'sense of entitlement' generation.  I know of someone who OTd, and while still on, but had not yet completed, their new MOSID QL3 yet the CFPAS year ended.  The mbr received a Developing (Cpl) PER and was pretty upset.  This person was a MS when their OT went thru and couldn't comprehend how they could get a Developing. 

This example is indicative of the problem we've created with inflated assessment, the whole concept of Ready doesn't actually equate to Ready to be promoted, it means something else now.  Why is it so impossible to be a 3 year Cpl and still get a Developing?  Is every Cpl *ready* to be promoted to MCpl after 3 years in rank?  Hell, I know some Jacks who were in the rank for 5 or more years who still weren't "ready" to for the appointment.

We are reaping what we`ve sewn over the past decade+ and IMO, as an organization there needs to be a change in mentality more than their needs to be a change in CFPAS.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I say let them grieve it. If their representations don't fit the word pictures, they won't win the grievance.

OR, we embrace our responsibility as leaders at various levels, and provide the mbr with some informal or formal PD and educate them on the GSK they are lacking.

I think its been mentioned but IF the mbr received an initial PDR and the CFPAS process was followed i.e. interview with the mbr throughout the CFPA cycle, they wouldn`t be surprised with the D or even a low-middle R and wouldn`t feel the need to grieve.

If they are a IPC1 Cpl and act like an IPC1, written up like an IPC1 Cpl and think they `have the skillz of a IPIC4 WO`, then ya let them grieve.  :nod:

 

[Eye In The Sky]

This is the real issue. If a supervisor does not issue PDRs what document does he have to back up his version of events? If you don't give him an initial PDR with expectations based on the members position how do you argue that he did or didn't meet or exceed a standard? There must be a standard set for one to exceed it.

As other have said, there are much bigger problems with the system than whether or not someone gets a PDR. However, you personally may not be able to stop the other ones but you can make sure your subordinates recieved what they are entitled to and is mandated for you to give.

Let`s take it a step further.  Why are the superiors who are NOT doing PDRs and PERs not being held accountable across the board.  The QR & O Vol 1, Ch 1, Art 1.02 *Definitions* makes clear what the word SHALL means.  I believe the CFPAS policy states PDRs shall be written.

Next:

From QR & O, Vol 1, Ch 4.

4.01 - RESPONSIBILITY OF OFFICERS TO SUPERIORS

An officer is responsible to his immediate superior for the proper and efficient performance of his duties.

(M)

4.02 - GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF OFFICERS

(1) An officer shall:
a.become acquainted with, observe and enforce:i.the National Defence Act,
ii.the Security of Information Act,
iii.QR&O, and
iv.all other regulations, rules, orders and instructions that pertain to the performance of the officer's duties;

b.afford to all persons employed in the public service such assistance in the performance of their duties as is practical;
c.promote the welfare, efficiency and good discipline of all subordinates;
d.ensure the proper care and maintenance, and prevent the waste, of all public and non-public property within the officer's control; and
e.report to the proper authority any infringement of the pertinent statutes, regulations, rules, orders and instructions governing the conduct of any person subject to the Code of Service Discipline when the officer cannot deal adequately with the matter.

Seems pretty clear. 

Next, from Ch 5.:

5.01- GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF NON-COMMISSIONED MEMBERS

A non-commissioned member shall:
a.become acquainted with, observe and enforce i.the National Defence Act,
ii.the Security of Information Act, (5 June 2008)
iii.QR&O, and
iv.all other regulations, rules, orders and instructions that pertain to the performance of the member's duties;

(See articles 1.22 – Accessibility of Regulations, Orders and Instructions and 4.26 – Publicity of Regulations, Orders, Instructions, Correspondence and Publications.)
b.afford to all persons employed in the public service such assistance in the performance of their duties as is practical;
c.promote the welfare, efficiency and good discipline of all who are subordinate to the member;
d.ensure the proper care and maintenance and prevent the waste of all public and non-public property within the member's control; and
e.report to the proper authority any infringement of the pertinent statutes, regulations, rules, orders and instructions governing the conduct of any person subject to the Code of Service Discipline.

(M) (9 May 2008 effective 5 June 2008)

Again clear to me.

And the `all other regulations...`part covers the CFPAS ones doesn`t it?  We have DAODs that cover Conduct and Performance deficiencies.  We have tools in the DAODs like Remedial Measures that offer options to correct those Conduct and Performance deficiencies, and the last I read they applied to ALL CF members.

What I see is a whole bunch of people not willing to implement, follow and enforce policy that is already implemented, which of course is contrary to the articles above from Vol 1, Ch's 4 & 5.  Too many people are 'doing what they want, not what they are supposed to', at all levels, and not being accountable for it.

Back when I was a Cl A PRES type say, my Sqn followed the CFPAS policy.  We did PXRs after a weekend ex.  We did initial PDRs, one PDR review as a minimum and PERs.  We had troop files with all this stuff in it.  When Tpr Bloggins got his PER, it was no surprise because he/she got regular feedback on their performance.

This was on Cl A time; 3 hours a week, one or two weekend ex's a month.  After a weekend ex, each crew commander wrote up the PXRs on his crew.  20-30 min's tops.  Initial PDRs, we had templates for Obs, Driver, Crew Commander, Ptl Commander, etc.  You took the template, edited it and voila, initial PDRs in quick time.  Did the Critical Task/Expected Results for the Tp WO change much from year to year?  Or the Tp WO's driver, who was usually the Snr Driver and had responsibilities in garrison and the field at times like O Grps where he would be left to oversee the work (garrison) or crew level battle procedure?  Templates made it work and work well.

If Cl A types can follow the CFPAS process (and we did, because we were directed to by the Sqn leadership and it was supervised like anything else we did by our superiors...aka leadership acted like leadership), then the rest of the CF can.  It doesn't matter 'how busy you are, or think you are'.  We made it happen in the limited timelines we were operating under because we made it efficient at all levels, and the leadership at all levels did their job as leaders. 

CFPAS wasn't broken.  OUR (the general CAF membership OUR, at all levels) application of it was.  You bring in a new system to replace it, you better make it clear it SHALL be followed or we are just pissin' away tax dollars, and I'd rather see those monies turned into better combat boots & bullets, YFR and gas for ships.  :2c:

 

[BinRat55]

Let`s take it a step further.  Why are the superiors who are NOT doing PDRs and PERs not being held accountable across the board.  The QR & O Vol 1, Ch 1, Art 1.02 *Definitions* makes clear what the word SHALL means.  I believe the CFPAS policy states PDRs shall be written.

Next:

From QR & O, Vol 1, Ch 4.

4.01 - RESPONSIBILITY OF OFFICERS TO SUPERIORS

An officer is responsible to his immediate superior for the proper and efficient performance of his duties.

(M)

4.02 - GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF OFFICERS

(1) An officer shall:
a.become acquainted with, observe and enforce:i.the National Defence Act,
ii.the Security of Information Act,
iii.QR&O, and
iv.all other regulations, rules, orders and instructions that pertain to the performance of the officer's duties;

b.afford to all persons employed in the public service such assistance in the performance of their duties as is practical;
c.promote the welfare, efficiency and good discipline of all subordinates;
d.ensure the proper care and maintenance, and prevent the waste, of all public and non-public property within the officer's control; and
e.report to the proper authority any infringement of the pertinent statutes, regulations, rules, orders and instructions governing the conduct of any person subject to the Code of Service Discipline when the officer cannot deal adequately with the matter.

Seems pretty clear. 

Next, from Ch 5.:

5.01- GENERAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF NON-COMMISSIONED MEMBERS

A non-commissioned member shall:
a.become acquainted with, observe and enforce i.the National Defence Act,
ii.the Security of Information Act, (5 June 2008)
iii.QR&O, and
iv.all other regulations, rules, orders and instructions that pertain to the performance of the member's duties;

(See articles 1.22 – Accessibility of Regulations, Orders and Instructions and 4.26 – Publicity of Regulations, Orders, Instructions, Correspondence and Publications.)
b.afford to all persons employed in the public service such assistance in the performance of their duties as is practical;
c.promote the welfare, efficiency and good discipline of all who are subordinate to the member;
d.ensure the proper care and maintenance and prevent the waste of all public and non-public property within the member's control; and
e.report to the proper authority any infringement of the pertinent statutes, regulations, rules, orders and instructions governing the conduct of any person subject to the Code of Service Discipline.

(M) (9 May 2008 effective 5 June 2008)

Again clear to me.

And the `all other regulations...`part covers the CFPAS ones doesn`t it?  We have DAODs that cover Conduct and Performance deficiencies.  We have tools in the DAODs like Remedial Measures that offer options to correct those Conduct and Performance deficiencies, and the last I read they applied to ALL CF members.

What I see is a whole bunch of people not willing to implement, follow and enforce policy that is already implemented, which of course is contrary to the articles above from Vol 1, Ch's 4 & 5.  Too many people are 'doing what they want, not what they are supposed to', at all levels, and not being accountable for it.

Back when I was a Cl A PRES type say, my Sqn followed the CFPAS policy.  We did PXRs after a weekend ex.  We did initial PDRs, one PDR review as a minimum and PERs.  We had troop files with all this stuff in it.  When Tpr Bloggins got his PER, it was no surprise because he/she got regular feedback on their performance.

This was on Cl A time; 3 hours a week, one or two weekend ex's a month.  After a weekend ex, each crew commander wrote up the PXRs on his crew.  20-30 min's tops.  Initial PDRs, we had templates for Obs, Driver, Crew Commander, Ptl Commander, etc.  You took the template, edited it and voila, initial PDRs in quick time.  Did the Critical Task/Expected Results for the Tp WO change much from year to year?  Or the Tp WO's driver, who was usually the Snr Driver and had responsibilities in garrison and the field at times like O Grps where he would be left to oversee the work (garrison) or crew level battle procedure?  Templates made it work and work well.

If Cl A types can follow the CFPAS process (and we did, because we were directed to by the Sqn leadership and it was supervised like anything else we did by our superiors...aka leadership acted like leadership), then the rest of the CF can.  It doesn't matter 'how busy you are, or think you are'.  We made it happen in the limited timelines we were operating under because we made it efficient at all levels, and the leadership at all levels did their job as leaders. 

CFPAS wasn't broken.  OUR (the general CAF membership OUR, at all levels) application of it was.  You bring in a new system to replace it, you better make it clear it SHALL be followed or we are just pissin' away tax dollars, and I'd rather see those monies turned into better combat boots & bullets, YFR and gas for ships.  :2c:

:bravo:

And if I could find an emoticon with a 100,000 people in a full on cheer I would have put that there to!!

Well said Eye in the Sky!

 

[George Wallace]

The whole organization has gotten lazy when it comes to administration.  UERs are no longer kept, because everything is on Monitor Mass or the members MPPR.  Yeah!  Right!  They do not accurately reflect the members actual employment, rank, etc. for that time period.  We used to keep Gun Logs for our tanks, and Maintenance Logs.  Those were done away with.  Troop and Platoon WOs and Officers used to keep detailed info on all their troops in their pockets, in Attendance books, and conduct regular face to face interviews with their subordinates.  Digitalization has made us lazy.  Everything was supposed to be entered onto a database and easily accessible.  Yeah!  Right!  How many times have we found people too lazy to enter the data, or just not knowledgeable to do data entry?  How many times have we seen database programs changed, deleted, replaced by newer databases, incompatible databases that did not communicate with or link to other databases, corrupted files, programs that were not backwards compatible, and so many other problems with the ever changing advances in technology?  Then we have the "Good Idea Faerie" who has some grandiose scheme to bring in change.     

This whole discussion has proven how far the administration done by supervisors has degraded.

We have also covered many similar arguments in other threads on leadership and how OP ORDERS were once done on a couple pages of a Field Message Book, now becoming hundreds of pages long. 

It would seem that our steps towards making everything digital, we have not made our jobs simpler, but more complex and inefficient.  ???

 

[BinRat55]

George raises some very valid points - 

The whole organization has gotten lazy when it comes to administration.  ... Digitalization has made us lazy.  Everything was supposed to be entered onto a database and easily accessible.  Yeah!  Right!  How many times have we found people too lazy to enter the data, or just not knowledgeable to do data entry?     

This whole discussion has proven how far the administration done by supervisors has degraded.

It would seem that our steps towards making everything digital, we have not made our jobs simpler, but more complex and inefficient.  ???

I especially like the one about being knowledgeable... This is indicative IMO of an aging CoC (not a bad thing at all) not being educated properly. You take the grumpy Warrant who joined in 1974 and did as George stated - put everything on an FMP. Now he is a CWO (very well earned BTW) looking for his FMP, not quite getting this new CFPAS program, so how is he supposed to enforce it? He won't.

I have had Sexual Misconduct Training shoved down my throat 6 ways to Sunday over the past three months. More training (a whole Op stood up for this...) and discussion groups and PD sessions in a month than ALL combined training, learning and teachable moments WRT CFPAS and PERs in general. That HAS to say something. We need to not only DO, but educate as well. The programs we grow into need to be taught and THEN enforced. Monitor Mass is a great example. Some swear by it, some have never heard of it. All I know is that it's only as good as the sum of it's users - no more, no less. CFPAS is similar. If not everyone knows how to use it, I can't ever see it working properly.

Lazy - but with an excuse. I was never taught. Now as we all know, there is no excuse for ignorance. It's not like we (as a society) have never even discussed a PDR, the CFPAS, Monitor Mass - who knows how to operate an FMP?

 

[Blackadder1916]

... This is indicative IMO of an aging CoC (not a bad thing at all) not being educated properly. You take the grumpy Warrant who joined in 1974 and did as George stated - put everything on an FMP. Now he is a CWO (very well earned BTW) looking for his FMP, not quite getting this new CFPAS program, so how is he supposed to enforce it? He won't.

I think you may have the age factor backwards.  It is not (IMO) an aging CoC of Luddites.  The COs and RSMs of today are (to my knowledge anyway, which could be in error) usually rising to those positions in the same time frame as back in my era (I, like your example, enrolled in the 70s).  Most LCols (especially the streamers who usually get the command slots) reached that rank well before they turn 40 and it was unusual (back in my day) to find an RSM (often the first job as a CWO) over the age of 45 (often younger).  So instead of viewing the normal CoC as someone who was 17 to 20 years old in 1974, you should be thinking of them as 17 to 20 year olds in 1994.  If they haven't figured out what a computer is, then not only would I question their competency as officers and warrant officers, but I would wonder how they even passed their version of the CFAT.  I will, however, shake my head at the over-dependence of digitalization.  Like GW,  I carried around the basic career history (including the all important clothing and footwear sizes) and the recent performance history (including a record of all meetings to discuss or review that performance) of every member of my platoon and later company in a notebook.  When my pencil broke, I just sharpened it with my penknife.  When my laptop broke (and it actually did once while on ex in Wainwright just after completing two weeks of work drafting comments for my CO about the "proposed" DART), I was f**ked.

 

[MJP]

RAAUZYUW RCCPJAQ1006 2361518-UUUU--RCCBMUA.
ZNR UUUUU ZOC
R 201400Z AUG 15
FM NDHQ CMP OTTAWA//MPMCT//
TO AIG 1742//ADMIN O//
BT
NATO UNCLAS MPMCT 001
SUBJ: UER CANCELLATION
REF:  HTTP://UPKPROD.DESC.MIL.CA/HRMSP/ENG/DATA/TOC.HTML

1.MPMCT HAS RECEIVED NUMEROUS QUESTIONS FROM UNITS DURING OUR DATA CLEAN UP VISITS AND THROUGH THE MHRRP(A-PM-245)POSITIONAL MAILBOX QUESTIONING WHEN WE WOULD CANCEL THE UER AND THE MHRRP TOPIC ON THE UER

2.UERS ARE NO LONGER BEING CREATED NOR MAINTAINED. WITH THE ROLL OUT OF HRMS 7.5 IN 1996, THE ELECTRONIC RECORD PROVIDED ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN THE UER EXCEPT FOR THE 743A USED IN THE PROMOTION FROM PTE TO CPL. IN ADDITION, THE UER WAS SPECIFIC FOR REGULAR FORCE MEMBERS AND MEMBERS ON CLASS C SERVICE, NOT RESERVE FORCE MEMBERS

3.WITH THE TRANSITIONING FROM PEOPLESOFT 7.5 TO 9.1 (GUARDIAN) AND THE TOTAL FORCE RECORD, WE ARE REVIEWING ALL CURRENT PROCESS AND PROCEDURES. THEREFORE, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, THE UER IS CANCELLED AND THE MHRRP UER TOPIC HAS BEEN UPDATED WITH ADDITIONAL DETAILS. UERS HELD BY UNITS OR FOUND IN THE CF 478 ENVELOPE ARE TO BE GIVEN TO THE MEMBER WHO MUST SIGN A DND 728 ON RECEIPT

4.TO ALL SUPT CLK, PLEASE PASS ON THIS GUARDIAN INFORMATION TO YOUR SUBORDINATE FORMATIONS/UNITS AND PLEASE INCLUDE IN YOUR ROUTINE ORDERS.

END OF ENGLISH TEXT/DEBUT DE TEXTE FRANCAIS

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I have staffed multiple memo's over 7-8 years, to at least 3 URSs to have a simple change on my MPRR done WRT training history and national qual's.  The changes never got done.  My UER is, however, up to date and accurate.

My UER will continue to be updated.  The MPRR system is BROKEN and I am simply fucking tired of drafting up a new memo with the original memos, follow on memo's and all ref's attached to have SFA done about it.

Policies and systems don't mean shit until the people who are supposed to be using them start using them correctly. 

Our support systems are inefficient, time consuming and built around a "talk wagging the dog"mentality;  medical, admin, and supply.  Can't speak for every geo location but those are my observations, certainly over the past decade. 

I am an operator.  I go to work to (1) operate (2) try to become better at #1 and (3) help trg subordinates in #s 1 & 2.  I waste more time chasing my tail with useless BS than I do of #s 1, 2 and 3 atleast 25% of the time.

SNAFU has become "ops normal".

 

[BinRat55]

Policies and systems don't mean crap until the people who are supposed to be using them start using them correctly.

Case and point - CFPAS, PeopleSoft, DRMIS... much much more...

Our support systems are inefficient, time consuming and built around a "talk wagging the dog"mentality;  medical, admin, and supply.  Can't speak for every geo location but those are my observations, certainly over the past decade. 

I am an operator.  I go to work to (1) operate (2) try to become better at #1 and (3) help trg subordinates in #s 1 & 2.  I waste more time chasing my tail with useless BS than I do of #s 1, 2 and 3 atleast 25% of the time.

SNAFU has become "ops normal".

Which is unfortunate because no one learns that way. Your final statement - SNAFU has become "ops normal" - is soooo true.

 

[dapaterson]

If personal equipment doesn't work, file a UCR - it's a tool to escalate problems to a point where they can be addressed.

If your MPRR isn't being updated by the URS, then use a similar tool to escalate.  Either get your CoC engaged, or send the next memo to the next level above where things were stalled.

I like using email (with read receipt) for such things.  It's a great way to forward supervisors the chain of what happened when you're seeking help in unbefuckling a situation.

 

[KuroKuma]

After over a year of keeping my mouth shut I feel I have to say something even if it won't change anything, I'll feel a bit better. So back in 2013 I started to work at the WO & Sgts Mess here on base. It was great I had an awesome Supervisor that not only made feel like I was an essential member of the team but also showed me respect and had faith in me. We worked together in the same office and work with really fun. I had never had this in my entire career and did my best to exceed expectations.

Fast forward a few months and my supervisor had a medical incident that was accidental but with rumors flying around about her being an alcoholic (which were untrue and unfounded), she was removed from the mess and I was given a new Supervisor. Once everything got sorted out I went on leave for two weeks with the family, only to come back and find out that my desk and the contents of it were put down in the basement and I had to bring it all upstairs to the storage closet in the bar and that was to be my new office.

After a few weeks I had to know why I was removed from the office and was told that my supervisor wanted space so he could have meetings. I let it go but things started to get worse, the privileges I had earned were taken away, my responsibilities were changed so I no longer ran the bar I just did the paperwork, restocked the bar, and did a bunch GD work even though we had pats.
To sum it up I was treated like I was nothing, no matter how hard I worked, long hours I would work, professional development I would do it never met his standards. I would wake up every morning and dread going in to work. I became severely depressed and it started to affect other aspects of my life, to the point where my spouse was thinking of taking my children and leaving me. So after over a year of never getting any positive feedback, being given demeaning tasks to do, and knowing no matter who I talked to especially mental health that it wouldn't change anything.

So one day after having my supervisor give me my PDR that made me look like I didn't know how to do my job I went home and attempted to take my life. I woke up in the hospital the next day with my Padre in the room with me before I was escorted to the psych ward. Once I got out of the hospital I knew I had a tough road ahead but what happened was unexpected. I was treated like everything that led me to do what I did was all my fault. I was also placed on a mental fitness and suicide awareness course. The first question the instructor asked when we got to the suicide awareness portion was how everyone felt about suicide. Nothing like sitting in a room having people say that people like you are selfish, weak, a coward, and a disgrace. After having to go back to working with the same Supervisor for a few more months I was told I was going to be posted out. I was so happy and so was the family only to find out just before it was supposed to happen that it was cancelled. But my spouse couldn't take being here anymore so her and the kids packed up and went back out west. I got moved to another position on the base with a little help from the ombudsman's office. But then the PER I received was so horrible that even my Major was confused about how I went from getting a high ready the year prior to developing.

Anyway my conclusion is after everything I went through in the last few years I got screwed over while my old supervisor received an award for all the hard work he had done in his short time there. I left some details out because I didn't want this to drag out to long but I think what happened to me was wrong and that more should have been done to help me. Now I have a whole bunch of medication I have to take to try and be normal because all I have left is my job.

To whomever read this the whole way through, I appreciate you taking the time.

Thank you

 

[CountDC]

Read it.  Hopefully things will improve for you.

 

[mariomike]

Like CountDC said.

I went home and attempted to take my life.

Good to hear you survived.

 

[motorhead1]

I just recently got word that Im to be posted, how can I turn it down?

 

[Halifax Tar]

You can't. 

You can plead your case and maybe you reasons are good enough that the powers that be will cancel it but the reality is that it's not up to you.