Author Topic: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current  (Read 945 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SupersonicMax

    is back home.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 84,345
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,862
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #75 on: July 25, 2018, 10:55:23 »
If it will bring operational capacity to an unacceptable level?  Absolutely.

Offline Tcm621

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 13,375
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 761
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #76 on: July 25, 2018, 11:00:53 »
Furnitures argument is the most common one I hear but I have to agree with you. It's a career course, make it work. If you can't afford to send a guy on a 6 week course, you are past failure point.

Should troops be denied the chance at training because their higher CoC won't resource level to permit their absence?

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 225,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,912
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #77 on: July 25, 2018, 13:19:43 »
If it will bring operational capacity to an unacceptable level?  Absolutely.

There has to be a trade-off.  My trade and unit, if you don't come into the Sqn having PLQ as a remuster, and you merit, you will be an A/L MCpl.  Then, they have what...2 years max? to get the full qual or they revert.

We don't have that many flying positions, really, in the big scheme of things.  If we never sent people on PLQ because of "op tempo/requirements", we'd never send anybody.  Of the 5 MCpl's I have right now, all of them are A/L.  Our unit won't sign off their Lead appointment (required CO appointment IAW the FOM) unless they have PLQ (even though FIC would be the better required qual...that's a different story...).  If we don't send them, we don't produce Leads.  If we don't produce Leads, we don't put crews out the door and we don't create space for new B cats to move onto crews...so sometimes you have to "go slow now" so you can "go fast later"... :2c:

I don't remember a single person from our Sqn going on PLQ during Oct 2014 - present (the busy IMPACT times and immediate time following).  We're feeling that now with 5 A/Ls who have to go soon.

Heck, do they even load Cpl's on PLQ anymore, or is the A/L backlog not taking over the loading priority?
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline Furniture

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 28,802
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 424
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #78 on: July 25, 2018, 14:39:31 »
Furnitures argument is the most common one I hear but I have to agree with you. It's a career course, make it work. If you can't afford to send a guy on a 6 week course, you are past failure point.

What do you do when a trade is at or past the failure point in several locations? Stop promotions and make a bad retention problem even worse? Easy to say it's the way it should be when you aren't the one being held back compared to your peers by virtue of a posting message and not your performance.

Having A/L ranks are not ideal, but with mentorship and guidance from their supervisors a Jr. leader should be able to pick up 99.99% of what the CF PLQ teaches. If you are learning anything shocking or new on PLQ your leadership up to that point has failed miserably in my opinion.

CFPAS is imperfect, but at least the PER process is slowly improving by getting away from being a writing competition between bosses in different units. I am looking forward to seeing the  proposed new PER system.

Offline Tcm621

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 13,375
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 761
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #79 on: July 25, 2018, 16:16:49 »
What do you do when a trade is at or past the failure point in several locations? Stop promotions and make a bad retention problem even worse? Easy to say it's the way it should be when you aren't the one being held back compared to your peers by virtue of a posting message and not your performance.

Having A/L ranks are not ideal, but with mentorship and guidance from their supervisors a Jr. leader should be able to pick up 99.99% of what the CF PLQ teaches. If you are learning anything shocking or new on PLQ your leadership up to that point has failed miserably in my opinion.

CFPAS is imperfect, but at least the PER process is slowly improving by getting away from being a writing competition between bosses in different units. I am looking forward to seeing the  proposed new PER system.

If you are at a failure point, promoting unqualified people won't help. They still need to take the course and then you lose an even more important person because you tend to have less people at each rank level. I totally agree that PLQ is a bit of a waste but it has been watered down to virtually a guaranteed pass course. Make PLQ difficult and make people actually go on course and be put in charge every day with immediately feedback as to their shortcomings. Use that time to properly teach the CFPAS system, administration, the importance of dress and deportment, etc.

Part of the problem is that leadership often have no idea how this stuff works because they were never taught. I can't tell you how many Senior NCOs I know who don't actually know how CFPAS works or who to properly staff memos or grievances.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 225,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,912
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #80 on: July 25, 2018, 16:57:12 »
I am looking forward to seeing the  proposed new PER system.

Personally, I am not.  Why?  Because the same people will either ignore the rules in place and/or make up the ones they want to get the output they want, just like happens now in CFPAS.

This years CANFORGENs state "score controls have been eliminated".  No they haven't.  Unit boards shouldn't influence PER scores.   :rofl:  M'kay!

People who OT or are posted out during the APS don't get the PER that they are supposed to get (dealing with 2 of those this year who were OTs, both MCpls in their previous trades...they didn't even know they were supposed to get a PER covering 01 Ap 17 to their COS date when they OTd).  The list goes on.

CFPAS is not the problem.  The users and their desire if they are higher up on the food chain to impart their own "direction" is the problem.  CFPAS is simple and easy to use, it is the people who frig it up.

I am, however, 100% confident "senior leadership" will take the next system and warp it like they have CFPAS.   :nod:
« Last Edit: July 25, 2018, 18:08:28 by Eye In The Sky »
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline ModlrMike

    : Riding time again... woohooo!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 216,859
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,855
    • Canadian Association of Physician Assistants
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #81 on: July 25, 2018, 17:00:48 »
Part of the problem is that leadership often have no idea how this stuff works because they were never taught. I can't tell you how many Senior NCOs I know who don't actually know how CFPAS works or who to properly staff memos or grievances.

This is not a new problem. I did my SLC in 2000, and was astonished at the number of Sgts and WOs who could not construct a simple memo, let alone understand the components of effective personnel evaluation. The most cited reason was that they were too busy doing their real jobs. They could not understand the irony of their response.
WARNING: The consumption of alcohol may create the illusion that you are tougher,smarter, faster and better looking than most people.
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. (H.L. Mencken 1919)
Zero tolerance is the politics of the lazy. All it requires is that you do nothing and ban everything.

Offline Tcm621

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 13,375
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 761
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #82 on: July 26, 2018, 01:00:30 »
This is not a new problem. I did my SLC in 2000, and was astonished at the number of Sgts and WOs who could not construct a simple memo, let alone understand the components of effective personnel evaluation. The most cited reason was that they were too busy doing their real jobs. They could not understand the irony of their response.

Never said it was new. I hear the too busy working excuse all the time. I don't know about you but I always have a section in my part 1 about developing and evaluating subordinates.

Offline Brood

  • Guest
  • *
  • 20
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #83 on: February 02, 2019, 18:11:33 »
I downloaded the latest CFPAS and help files, but I'm missing the opt out option within PERX. Do I have to sacrifice a private first?

EDIT: It was the updated MOS files that I was missing, which CFPAS won't download since I don't have access to the Intranet.  I'm not sure how that was ever supposed to work, but fortunately I knew someone who had the updated files.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2019, 18:25:13 by Brood »

Offline Quirky

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 7,855
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 273
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #84 on: March 15, 2019, 11:40:02 »
Here is a new one for me. Finished a 2 dot ES PER for a developing, jnr Cpl. Lines for ES were accepted but PER was kicked back to me needing justification for S's to 'fluff up' the narrative section. I guess having a two-line PER for a new Cpl isn't accepted anymore?  :facepalm:

Offline PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 923,065
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,203
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #85 on: March 15, 2019, 13:06:24 »
Writing 2 lines to sum up an entire year of work for a Cpl is laziness and does that member a disservice. I believe the standard for a "Ready" PER is 9 lines performance, and 5 lines potential. Still significantly better than the old "fill the space" method of PER writing we so recently got away from.

Offline Jarnhamar

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 298,956
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,978
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #86 on: March 15, 2019, 13:13:05 »
The majority of write up's I've done for my own subordinates gets vetted and changed by 2 or 3 levels of the CoC so many times that it's not in my words anymore.

What they actually did isn't as important as whether I use improved or enhanced. Majority of my time is spent on synonyms. It's ridiculous.
There are no wolves on Fenris

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 462,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,789
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #87 on: March 15, 2019, 15:07:37 »
Majority ofBy and large my time is spent on synonymscrafting similar verbiage. It's ridiculousfoolhardy.

FTFY
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Quirky

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 7,855
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 273
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #88 on: March 15, 2019, 15:10:44 »
Writing 2 lines to sum up an entire year of work for a Cpl is laziness and does that member a disservice.

Not when it falls within the writing policy of the unit and CF. I don't recall it stating "when only two lines of narrative are used, comment on S's as to not offend the member". The whole point of the new CFPAS system was to reduce the unnecessary time spent on crap like this. I've handed out double N/As PERs before without issue.

Offline kev994

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Member
  • *
  • 3,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 211
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #89 on: March 15, 2019, 18:17:23 »
I recall seeing direction lately that if they are straight S, at minimum you need to record their accomplishments for the year. For potential “N/A” is acceptable for Ready.

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 225,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,912
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #90 on: March 25, 2019, 13:28:16 »
I was having some issues with the Help files on my home PC (Win7), contacted the CFPAS helpdesk and they were able to get me sorted out.  Not a fix I'd of thought of; picture attached to make it easier.

- Installing the updated help files, once you download the ZIP file, before you extract the files, right click on the zip folder and select Properties;
- a window should open up (the image on the left in the attached pic).  Ref the red box...click the UNBLOCK and then APPLY buttons;
- you can verify the security stuff is fixed by selecting Properties again, the window should look like the image on the right of the attached pic;  and
- you can then extract/overwrite the Help files and everything works (or it did for me at least).
Everything happens for a reason.

Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

Offline stellarpanther

  • Member
  • ****
  • 2,015
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 115
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #91 on: May 08, 2019, 21:21:18 »
Does anyone have the reference to opt out of receiving future PER's?

Offline mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 513,220
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,568
    • The job.
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #92 on: May 08, 2019, 22:12:36 »
Does anyone have the reference to opt out of receiving future PER's?

See also,

PER opt-out denied 
https://navy.ca/forums/index.php?topic=119446.0
OP: "Does anyone have any more info about the option to opt out of a per?"

CANFORGEN 014/16 CMP 011/16 281603Z JAN 16
CHANGES TO CANADIAN ARMED FORCES (CAF) MILITARY PERSONNEL EVALUATION REPORT (PER) FOR THE 2015/2016 REPORTING YEAR

REF: A. CANFORGEN 220/14 CMP 102/14 181519Z DEC 14
B. CFPAS HELP FILE
C. CANFORGEN 120/15 CMP 055/15 061540Z JUL 15 (CAF ANNUAL SELECTION BOARDS FILE REMOVAL DUE TO EXPIRED FITNESS)

Reply #1252
https://navy.ca/forums/index.php/topic,636.msg1415270.html#msg1415270
C.  OPTING OUT, ANOTHER DRT INITIATIVE, HAS PROVEN VERY POPULAR AND HIGHLY EFFECTIVE IN MANAGING PER WORKLOADS AND INDIVIDUAL EXPECTATIONS. IAW REF B ARTICLE 125, OPT OUT REMAINS AN OPTION FOR PERSONNEL WHO DO NOT WISH TO HAVE AN ANNUAL PER. PERSONNEL WHO OPT OUT, DO NOT NEED TO RESUBMIT EACH YEAR, BUT UPON POSTING SHOULD INFORM THEIR NEW CO OF THEIR ELECTION TO OPT OUT. TO ENSURE EFFICIENT UNIT PER ADMINISTRATION, A MBR SHOULD SIGNAL THEIR INTENTION TO OPT NLT END OF JANUARY 2016. MEMBERS AND COMMAND TEAM ARE ENCOURAGED TO REVIEW ARTICLE 125 OF REF B FOR OPT OUT PROCESS IMPLICATIONS AND NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS

Has anyone here opted out of the PER process?
https://navy.ca/forums/index.php/topic,636.msg1424065.html#msg1424065

etc...
« Last Edit: May 08, 2019, 22:22:58 by mariomike »

Offline AK

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 8,905
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 64
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #93 on: May 09, 2019, 09:17:29 »
"Opt Out/ Opt Back In" is in Chapter 1, section 125 of the CFPAS Help file. 

However, I found the link to the official memo format isn't working for me now.  If anyone else has the same issue, feel free to PM me and I'll be happy to share mine privately.  When I was down south, I didn't have access to the updated CFPAS help files and submitted a non-standard memo requesting opt out.  My CM was rather shirty about it.  Don't make the same mistake as me!

I've opted our for four years now.  It's been liberating.

Cheers,

AK

Offline Navy_Pete

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • 31,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 874
Re: PERs : All issues questions...2018-current
« Reply #94 on: May 09, 2019, 10:54:30 »
Does anyone know if the ref for PERs for postings to the ATL was updated for this year?  Expect to get one for the first portion of my reporting period from my last unit before starting the PGT, but want to double check.