# P.E.R signed after June 1st



## InVIcTuS_69 (17 Jun 2010)

Good Day,

I know the PER limit date to get mailed to Ottawa is June 1st. But what I'd like to know is simple... what happens if your own PER is signed and mailed after June 1st ?


----------



## Gunner98 (17 Jun 2010)

Nothing June 1 is an arbitrary date so that records can be assembled in time for the screening for the Selection Boards in the fall.  If you are not eligible for promotion or any major career courses then you have no worries.


----------



## KrazyHamburglar (17 Jun 2010)

I've been told that about 70% of the PER make the june 1st deadline, so I assume that its not a big deal if some are late a little...


----------



## PMedMoe (17 Jun 2010)

Yes, that's true.  The boards don't even sit until the fall.

Our unit presently has about 18 outstanding.  Mine included*.   

*Not the ones _I_ wrote.   ;D


----------



## McG (17 Jun 2010)

Simian Turner said:
			
		

> Nothing June 1 is an arbitrary date so that records can be assembled in time for the screening for the Selection Boards in the fall.


It is not really arbitrary (this would imply there is no logic to the selected date).  The date is chosen so that the PER centre can receive, process, file, and persue deliquent PERs.  Unfortunately, many PERs still have not arrived well after the boards have sat.  For some people this may not have a negative impact this year, but that missing PER may cause problems next year or the year after.


----------



## Pusser (17 Jun 2010)

Every year, there are hundreds of PERs that have not arrived at NDHQ in time for the merit boards in the Fall.  Career Managers are left scrambling trying to track down and get them collected.  This is a disgraceful situation and anyone contributing to it should be ashamed of themselves.  Although PERs should never be rushed, there is plenty of time to complete this key leadership task within the current guidelines.  In reference to the original question, missing the deadline by a few days or even weeks is not a big deal.  It's missing it by months that is unacceptable.


----------



## Aerobicrunner (17 Jun 2010)

As of 15 Jun 10, there are 24,721 delinquent PER's.

You can check to see if your PER is in Ottawa by going to the following DWAN link and clicking PER Reports:  http://hr.ottawa-hull.mil.ca/dgmc/engraph/CFPAS_home_e.asp?Opensub=64


----------



## catalyst (17 Jun 2010)

I haven't got mine......and wont get it until September (heading on TD). Oh well..........


----------



## aesop081 (17 Jun 2010)

ArmySailor said:
			
		

> I haven't got mine......and wont get it until September (heading on TD). Oh well..........



That is no excuse on the part of your CoC. My unit had members away as well and arrangements were made for their PERs to be provided to them, signed and sent to Ottawa. It was not the ideal way to do things but the paperwork was done on time.


----------



## dogger1936 (17 Jun 2010)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> That is no excuse on the part of your CoC. My unit had members away as well and arrangements were made for their PERs to be provided to them, signed and sent to Ottawa. It was not the ideal way to do things but the paperwork was done on time.



Agreed. I was out in the back sticks on EX when a shiney SUV hauled up into our hide and a clerk jumped out with my PER to sign.From a differnt base....on time. Sounds like someone in your CoC is steller at admin.


----------



## pylon (17 Jun 2010)

Simian Turner said:
			
		

> Nothing June 1 is an arbitrary date so that records can be assembled in time for the screening for the Selection Boards in the fall.  If you are not eligible for promotion or any major career courses then you have no worries.



Interesting... I just received an immediate and am on my C17 loadmaster course next month...  and signed my PER on June 4th... outstanding..


----------



## aesop081 (18 Jun 2010)

pylon said:
			
		

> Interesting... I just received an immediate and am on my C17 loadmaster course next month...  and signed my PER on June 4th... outstanding..



It will still be in Ottawa in time for the boards.


----------



## Gunner98 (18 Jun 2010)

Aerobicrunner said:
			
		

> As of 15 Jun 10, there are 24,721 delinquent PER's.



MCG,

An *arbitrary* decision is one made without regard for the facts and circumstances presented, and it connotes a disregard of the evidence, enuff said.


----------



## catalyst (18 Jun 2010)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> That is no excuse on the part of your CoC. My unit had members away as well and arrangements were made for their PERs to be provided to them, signed and sent to Ottawa. It was not the ideal way to do things but the paperwork was done on time.



I was actually looking forward to it too - I have only been in the job a short time so would like some feedback (haven't had a PDR either....hmmm). I'm not too worried as I am a reservist and obviously its not the same as ya'll regforce guys.  

Everytime I asked about it I was told I was 'too pushy".  ;D


----------



## captloadie (18 Jun 2010)

There has to be a balance between getting the PERs signed, and getting them debriefed. Its great that some unknown clerk jumped out and had you sign a PER, but that really defeats the whole purpose if you aren't debriefed at some time by the CoC. It's easy to slag the CoC about not getting PERs signed on time, but isn't it better to be late with a good product debriefed properly, than rush to meet a deadline with a piece of crap?

I know someone will cry out that we know the deadline every year and should do our time appreciations to meet that, but in my opinion writing PERs in Jan (which happens in very large units) to meet the deadline is unfair to the member.


----------



## dogger1936 (18 Jun 2010)

captloadie said:
			
		

> There has to be a balance between getting the PERs signed, and getting them debriefed. Its great that some unknown clerk jumped out and had you sign a PER, but that really defeats the whole purpose if you aren't debriefed at some time by the CoC. It's easy to slag the CoC about not getting PERs signed on time, but isn't it better to be late with a good product debriefed properly, than rush to meet a deadline with a piece of crap?
> 
> I know someone will cry out that we know the deadline every year and should do our time appreciations to meet that, but in my opinion writing PERs in Jan (which happens in very large units) to meet the deadline is unfair to the member.



It's necessary when your away from your unit on a 3 month tasking to a differnt base. In a perfect world we would all be able to be debreifed, however due to employment limitations this was the best way to get it done.


----------



## aesop081 (18 Jun 2010)

captloadie said:
			
		

> There has to be a balance between getting the PERs signed, and getting them debriefed.



Yup. Thats why a unit with a bit of organization can have the PER signed and debreifed by the CoC even when the member is away. 




> I know someone will cry out that we know the deadline every year and should do our time appreciations to meet that, but in my opinion writing PERs in Jan (which happens in very large units) to meet the deadline is unfair to the member.



1st *drafts* are usualy being done in late jan / early feb and that is usualy for immediates or formation ranked PERs. Others are usualy due much later. The nice thing about drafts is that they are not final. If the member should have done something warranting mention, there is plenty of time to make changes. I have seen this many times.


----------



## Gunner98 (19 Jun 2010)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> The nice thing about drafts is that they are not final. If the member should have done something warranting mention, there is plenty of time to make changes. I have seen this many times.



The not so nice thing about printed drafts from subordinates on which you have made suggested changes is that in the case of a NDHQ redress investigation, you must produce them, be prepared to defend your changes and confirm that the member was counselled accordingly.  From experience, drafts once forwarded up the chain of command and reviewed are legitimate documents and subject to the ATIP.


----------



## armyvern (19 Jun 2010)

Simian Turner said:
			
		

> The not so nice thing about printed drafts from subordinates on which you have made suggested changes is that in the case of a NDHQ redress investigation, you must produce them, be prepared to defend your changes and confirm that the member was counselled accordingly.  From experience, drafts once forwarded up the chain of command and reviewed are legitimate documents and subject to the ATIP.



Absolutely agreed.

Here's the issue:

We lowly types begin the process ~ Feb ... a draft PER. It is not submitted, nor is it final. It is a DRAFT. It is subject to change based upon any mitigating or changing factors in the members performance UNTIL 31 March. By the last week of March, our troops' PERs are usually pretty bang-on and unless troop X fucks up severely in that last week, there will probably be no more change to it.

Why the hell, then, does it take until end-May for those PERs to come back DOWN to us from the powers that be so that we can debrief our troops and have them signed? They've had them for months!! Don't tell me that they need to be reviewed or re-written by some Officer type with a Masters in English who feels the need to change out the writing to 15 letter words that no one but his own co-graduates understand. It`s happened. It`s also resulted in all the PERs being put back to their original forms by us down here doing the business and seeing with our own actual eyes-on the business getting done.

Branch Boards? Base Boards? They sure as heck shouldn't take 3 months either. A little proper planning and Org would solve that - the same thing happens each and every year after all. Perhaps, the problem actually is that there's too many people involved AFTER the Unit level who think that 1 June is just an arbitrary date and that "they aren't really needed until the fall".

PERs are supposed to BE in Ottawa (signed!) by 01 June. Period. That's the rule and it exists for a reason. It is *only* the troops who get fucked when that doesn't happen. Perhaps that's an issue too that it is only the troops who suffer the ill-effects of this. Maybe it's time to start holding the higher CoC responsable when on June 1st, "Unit X has not submitted their UIC PERs" leads to an answer of "Well, we have to hold them because we are still missing 18 PERs that the Comd (or other) is still reviewing (or hasn't gotten around to signing yet) before we can submit UIC return."

This failure of the CoC to act within the directed time period in an effecient manner that ensures "signed" PERs arrive at NDHQ by 1 June results in no implications for themselves, but, rather ironicly, affects only the career of the troop that PER is written for. 

"Geez, where's the incentive to get them done on time and to Ottawa by June 1st as it affects "me" not??"


----------



## captloadie (19 Jun 2010)

Vern,
In all the time you've written PERs, have you never had one returned because there were actual mistakes on it? Not small grammar things, but things like the dots filled wrong, or incorrect info (SN, rank, unit)? If so, this answers the question why it takes so long to get them back to you. There is usually only one poor sole responsible for the crappy job of checking every stinking PER in a unit to make sure they don't get sent to Ottawa with incorrect info *so that the troops aren't getting screwed by the supervisor who doesn't pay attention to detail.* 

And believe me, it sucks when a PER comes all the way back from being signed by a Formation commander, and the first thing a member says when being debriefed is "My name has two Ls in it, not one."


----------



## armyvern (19 Jun 2010)

captloadie said:
			
		

> Vern,
> In all the time you've written PERs, have you never had one returned because there were actual mistakes on it? Not small grammar things, but things like the dots filled wrong, or incorrect info (SN, rank, unit)? If so, this answers the question why it takes so long to get them back to you. There is usually only one poor sole responsible for the crappy job of checking every stinking PER in a unit to make sure they don't get sent to Ottawa with incorrect info *so that the troops aren't getting screwed by the supervisor who doesn't pay attention to detail.*
> 
> And believe me, it sucks when a PER comes all the way back from being signed by a Formation commander, and the first thing a member says when being debriefed is "My name has two Ls in it, not one."



Oh yes.

BUT, sorry all those typos and grammatical errors are fixed *before** it leaves the Unit to go to Branch, Base for signatures. 

So, that does NOT answer the question as to why - 2.5 months later they are STILL *outside* of our Unit with us bustling about screaming "we need these back to get the member's signature!! They are due in Ottawa signed in 2 days!" Perhaps, if they didn't take 2 months to do boards and sign them at higher ... there wouldn't be an issue.

*Before: as in "I" was the pers responsible to review/correct ours at the Coy level prior to their movement out to Branch and Base ... and they were good to go and sent higher* months * before we got them back from higher with the CoC signatures on them so that we could actually debrief our troops, have them sign and then get them to Ottawa.


Oh, and as a side-note: 99.9% of the time when the member does find a typo in it when he goes to sign it ... a review of the original and previous draft held until the final comes back ... shows that the error in grammar or typing was made outside of the Unit by someone else fiddling with it higher in the CoC - not the supervisor, so let's put that myth to rest right now.


----------



## captloadie (19 Jun 2010)

I'll call BS on that Vern. I have sat at the Wing level, and still saw hundreds of PERs that had passed through the unit and Branch level and still had mistakes in them. That is why they are all rechecked again, which takes a lot of time. The ones from Supply get put on the same pile for that one or two people assigned at the Wing level to do Permon. So even if yours didn't have mistakes, the other 300 sent in for signature might have.


----------



## armyvern (19 Jun 2010)

captloadie said:
			
		

> I'll call BS on that Vern. I have sat at the Wing level, and still saw hundreds of PERs that had passed through the unit and Branch level and still had mistakes in them. That is why they are all rechecked again, which takes a lot of time. The ones from Supply get put on the same pile for that one or two people assigned at the Wing level to do Permon. So even if yours didn't have mistakes, the other 300 sent in for signature might have.



Then, get mine signed and sent back to me so that MY Unit isn't getting it's troops fucked over by missing deadlines because some other Unit can't sort itself out.

Seems pretty simple to me.

Reminds me of the time every single one of our Coy PERs came back from Base with the "potential" blocks ALL changed to present tense ... so that we had to then re-do every fracking one of them because someone felt they knew better and managed to screw the whole lot of them up. Meanwhile, they were bitching at us about "how off" our original submissions had been. Uhmmm, nope - it wasn't us who was off. I think it's hilarious when higher makes 10000 and 1 changes to a member's PER only to have it read closer to the actual original submission when it eventually returns --- because all those higher need to add their own tweaks. Talk about making admin for oneself.


----------



## meni0n (19 Jun 2010)

It's soon time to sign the first PDR of the year, so how long is too long waiting to sign a PER? I doubt we will see ours before August due to leave and posting season.


----------



## Gunner98 (19 Jun 2010)

The basic answer to meeting PER timelines is making those responsible, accountable for missing the deadline.  There are several dots in the performance section in which a supervisor at any level can and should be downgraded for inefficient time management and use of the CFPAS process.  The simple answer is that we (the collective we) need to clearly identify offenders that have affected the timely flow and use administrative action to record/reprimand their inefficiencies and unacceptable time management skills.  Each level of supervision should not receive their PER for signature until every subordinate below them has been debriefed and signed their PER.

We must use DND 728 (or equivalent) to track the flow and have date stamps (ink or electronic) to correspond to signatures.  Simply, leaders need to lead.

I had my theatre PER unexpectedly dropped in front of me by the designated Senior Canadian Representative (LCol), during a hectic, evening, Battle Update Brief in a room with 40 people.   The fact that I was coordinating an Airmedevac at the time by telephone, did not seem to concern the superior, nor did the fact that the Section 6 was not signed by his boss.  

We simply have to better.  On the positive side I did receive it before I left theatre.  On the negative side, my direct supervisor did not debrief me ever and the passage of the paper was how I was informed of several levels of the chain of command's observations about my 7-month performance in a busy, multinational combat headquarters in the sandbox.


----------



## armyvern (19 Jun 2010)

Simian Turner said:
			
		

> The basic answer to meeting PER timelines is making those responsible, accountable for missing the deadline.  There are several dots in the performance section in which a supervisor at any level can and should be downgraded for inefficient time management and use of the CFPAS process.  The simple answer is that we (the collective we) need to clearly identify offenders that have affected the timely flow and use administrative action to record/reprimand their inefficiencies and unacceptable time management skills.  Each level of supervision should not receive their PER for signature until every subordinate below them has been debriefed and signed their PER.
> ...



+100. As I stated in my first post ... there simply is NO incentive currently to get those causing the holdups working more effeciently and in a more timely manner. Waiting until D minus 2 for the Comd to sign them is simply *not* acceptable because in the meantime, Troop X has probably been tasked, is on course etc and is now - months later - not available to sign the thing at a debrief. Meanwhile, it's only Troop X whose career suffers the consequences. Unless, of course, we send NO troops anywhere after 01 April until Day X that the CoC finally signs off and sends back down the CoC for the troop debrief/signature & you just know that isn't going to fly.


----------



## captloadie (19 Jun 2010)

Two Points Army Vern:
1) I applaud the fact you have never made an error in your career (or so it would seem from the above posts);
2) At your new rank, you are soon going to have to stop blamming the higher ups and the CoC. You are the higher ups now, and it isn't always the guys who were the bars who need to take the blame.


----------



## armyvern (19 Jun 2010)

captloadie said:
			
		

> Two Points Army Vern:
> 1) I applaud the fact you have never made an error in your career (or so it would seem from the above posts);
> 2) At your new rank, you are soon going to have to stop blamming the higher ups and the CoC. You are the higher ups now, and it isn't always the guys who were the bars who need to take the blame.



Oh, I've made errors - you'll note that I didn't say 100% in my earlier. Each and every Unit that I have served with (obviously perhaps not those you've served with) have had our PERs in to higher level for higher appropriate action months before June, yet we never seem to get them back to hand out until end-May.

I have been a member of "higher" for quite some time now ... and my supervisors are held to, and accountable to meet, their assigned "due" dates by me. That's *my* job and I do it. I, being a mere MWO, have no control over what happens when they get to Branch/Base level ... but, believe-you-me ... I ask loudly "where are they?? We need them back" <--- and that is also *my* job, but at the end of the day ... I can't make those outside of us get work done; that's not *my* job. So, someone else will have to hold them accountable.


----------



## captloadie (19 Jun 2010)

Just so everyone knows, I am doing all this defending of the process even though my PER arrived to me here on my outcan posting only last week for signature. And, unfortunately, as stellar as it was, it has to be redone as I was promoted 1 Jan and it was written based on my old rank.  ;D


----------



## armyvern (19 Jun 2010)

captloadie said:
			
		

> Just so everyone knows, I am doing all this defending of the process even though my PER arrived to me here on my outcan posting only last week for signature. And, unfortunately, as stellar as it was, it has to be redone as I was promoted 1 Jan and it was written based on my old rank.  ;D



Well, now here's a question ...

Now that your career has implications due to it's lateness at central ... who is holding accountable the pers who screwed it up and making their career accountable for their own error instead of your career?

*That's* the point.


----------



## Pusser (20 Jun 2010)

I would like to know who the Einstein was who decided that we should use the fiscal year as the reporting period.  Managing a multi-million dollar budget with all kinds of pressure to micro-manage it down to the last penny in the final quarter (ensuring all goods are received prior to 31 March) means I have all kinds of extra time to spend on PERs.  Hmmm.  Write good PERs (review subordinate supervisors work), ensure budget properly managed, have a life - pick two. :-\


----------



## captloadie (21 Jun 2010)

That is a brilliant point. Hand in your budget forecasts or PAYEs late, and for sure that will affect your PER. Get your PERS done late, well, that's not so bad.  :


----------



## x-zipperhead (25 Jun 2010)

I am still waiting. It went back to the wing twice for corrections and then got sent to Ottawa without being debriefed.......the lack of my signature wasn't  enough of a clue I guess.   I am told it is on it's slow journey back for debriefing.  Frustrating? yes.  

If the boards don't sit until the fall am I getting screwed and if so, how?


----------



## Pusser (27 Jun 2010)

That's incredible!  That a PER could get sent to Ottawa without the member's signature is completely unacceptable.  That's a chain of command that doesn't give a damn.


----------



## captloadie (28 Jun 2010)

It is unlikely a CoC of command that doesn't give a damn. It is likely one individual somewhere who either doesn't give a damn, or is human and makes mistakes. If I'm a supervisor and go everyday to the Admin O and ask where my PERS are, and everyday they tell me, the register says its still at the Wing, all I can do is push the subject so far. And if by accident or carelessness someone didn't properly track those PERs, and they ended up in the wrong envelope, and oops, now it is in Ottawa unsigned, they will get sent back. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that we should be laissez faire about PERS, but we also have to be reasonable. 

X-zipperhead - you are not being screwed at all by this mistake. Even if your PER were to arrive the day of the board in Ottawa, as long as the CM knew it was coming, it would be included if need be. Even if it arrived late, and it was justified by the score of the PER, a supplemental board would likely be held to slot you into the correct spot on the merit list.


----------



## x-zipperhead (29 Jun 2010)

It was just a honest mistake by an individual.  It was actually the CoC that was following up and discovered the error.  I am not terribly worked up over it.  

As  I read through the thread, I just started wondering what some of the negative career implications might be that folks were referring to.  I now see that  there really are no implications. 

Thanks for the input. That clears things up.


----------

