Question for any RMS types out there...[Div Notes}

[Nfld Sapper]

And the main reason you can't save it to a DND computer HDD. Can either save it a 1.44 Mb Floppy disk or a Jump/USB drive.

 

[George Wallace]

Now if you can envision said sordid details (which aren't subject to the grievance process like PDRs and PERs) being made a permanent part of a Pers file - and then imagine who may in the course of their duties have access to a member's Pers file....you can see where this is going.

Excuse me!  If nothing would open up a case for a Grievance and a Harassment Charge, it would be the keeping of such "sordid" details in a Div Note.

 

[armyvern]

And the main reason you can't save it to a DND computer HDD. Can either save it a 1.44 Mb Floppy disk or a Jump/USB drive.

And don't forget "Entrust."  ;D

 

[284_226]

OK.  I have a few problems with this.  If they are being sent, packaged up with all the other Docs, not to be opened........how many times has the OR staff taken letter openers to envelope in envelope in envelope, etc. and suddenly all envelopes are open for distribution or filing?  Nor do I hold all supervisors honest enough to keep such documents 'sealed'.

Next, the comment that they are being sent as substantiation for something like C&P doesn't cut it, nor does it sound LEGAL.  All pertinent information about the C&P will be on the CHARGE/CONDUCT SHEET with follow up information in the PDR Quarterly reports stating whether or not the person being evaluated performed in satisfactory manner, and whether or not they were correcting their 'Faults' as listed on their PDR.

I agree completely.

As for 'Loosing Units' not doing the PDR or PER, that still does not justify the keeping of 'unauthorised' documentation on Pers.  It is up to the Unit to get the info from the other Unit in the 'Correct' documentation.

I see some serious problems here for the HA personnel should someone find that this 'System' has in any way prejudiced or damaged their career.

Prejudiced...yup, that about nails it.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

Right forgot about that pesky program ;D

 

[284_226]

Then why does the image of the PDR form filler in the current CFPAS download show that the form is "PROTECT B (WHEN COMPLETED)"?

I just started up CFPAS on my work laptop (CFPAS 2007.0.3), and it shows "PROTECTED A (WHEN COMPLETED)" at the top of the screen and form - as do the current copies of PDRs that I have here.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

I just started up CFPAS on my work laptop (CFPAS 2007.0.3), and it shows "PROTECTED A (WHEN COMPLETED)" at the top of the screen and form - as do the current copies of PDRs that I have here.

I think Mr. O'Leary might have meant PER which is Protected B vice PDR which is Protected A.


<edited for spelling>

 

[284_226]

If that info is indeed that grievous or sordid that it can not be contained within a PDR (which I highly doubt....); there are official means of paperwork to deal with that (ie medical chits etc)..not via unofficial Div notes. Sorry. Just not on.

I agree 100%.

And if there's no need for anyone other than the person writing them to know the contents as you've stated above, you have just wholey invalidated your argument for both drafting and passing that info on to the gaining Unit.

Sorry, I wasn't arguing for passing it on, I was trying to explain that serious damage could occur if it were passed on "under cover of the Pers file".

Which is precisely what appears to have happened.

 

[284_226]

Excuse me!  If nothing would open up a case for a Grievance and a Harassment Charge, it would be the keeping of such "sordid" details in a Div Note.

Except maybe the keeping of such "sordid" details in a Div Note contained in a Pers file, where they might be found by future OCs, COs, or grievance analysts who wouldn't otherwise have been privy to the information 

 

[Michael OLeary]

I think Mr. O'Leary might have meant PER which is Protected B vice PDR which is Protected A.

 

[George Wallace]

That's what I thought.  PDRs are Protected B when completed and properly secured in a 'locked' file drawer/cabinet, unlike Protected A.  You guys had be wondering. 


[Edit.  On bringing up CFPAS on my computer, I am proven wrong......it is Protected A on the form.  Time to review and refresh on all my Security Levels again.   :-[ ]

 

[284_226]

Run the actual CFPAS application, Michael...that appears to be the help documentation showing Protected B.  The tops of the forms in the application and on printed forms indicates Protected A for Sections 1/2, 3/4 and 5.

 

[George Wallace]

What Version are you using?

 

[gaspasser]

Hi All, been reading along here and having a bit of a time trying to understand what is being explained.  Are Div notes the same thing a PlWO / CSM notes for PER time and for the oncoming Supervisor.  IF so, IIRC, they are no longer allowed as it is passing on "opinions".  Could possible lead to  (now) harassment charges against the PER writter and higher authority.
Can someone of higher authority tell me if this practise is still done?
Cheers,  BYTD

 

[284_226]

What Version are you using?

CFPAS 2007.0.3 - the latest.  I've got my file folder of PDRs for the last few years, and they all show Protected A as well.  I think someone messed up in the Help documentation when they were creating the pictures.

 

[284_226]

Hi All, been reading along here and having a bit of a time trying to understand what is being explained.  Are Div notes the same thing a PlWO / CSM notes for PER time and for the oncoming Supervisor.  IF so, IIRC, they are no longer allowed as it is passing on "opinions".  Could possible lead to  (now) harassment charges against the PER writter and higher authority.
Can someone of higher authority tell me if this practise is still done?
Cheers,  BYTD

I think you have the comparison right, from what I've read - but Div Notes are still used (and allowed) in the Navy, and there are procedures for their handling.  However, I'm having difficulty finding a "quotable" reference that definitively states that they're not to be passed between units "unsealed" or contained in a Pers file.

 

[Michael OLeary]

I am also looking at version 2007.0.3 and it looks like a problem with the help file. 

Regardless, it doesn't make a case for Div Notes as the have been described.  If the information is that important, it should have been formally documented, not sealed in an envelope to be used against the member months or years after moving to a new job.

 

[284_226]

I am also looking at version 2007.0.3 and it looks like a problem with the help file. 

Yes, it looks like a problem with the screen captures they used in the CFPAS documentation.

Regardless, it doesn't make a case for Div Notes as the have been described.  If the information is that important, it should have been formally documented, not sealed in an envelope to be used against the member months or years after moving to a new job.

Agreed.

And I'll make a humongous stink about it, if I'm ever able to find something in writing that says it's not to be done!!  ;D

 

[rmacqueen]

Div notes are similar to RSM notes and are basically supposed to be used as nothing more than a quick reference on a member.  Anything contained in the notes is usually dealt with in an "off the record" manner and they are only supposed to be used in an official way as a reference for more serious actions, ie written warning, etc.  They should never be placed on a UPF and, IIRC are supposed to be destroyed upon the writing of the PER as any shortcomings or commendations contained in them are then official and they are no longer needed.

As for passing them to a new unit, I can only say that in 3 years working in the Records section in Esquimalt, I never once saw Div notes in anyones file.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Div notes are similar to RSM notes and are basically supposed to be used as nothing more than a quick reference on a member.  Anything contained in the notes is usually dealt with in an "off the record" manner and they are only supposed to be used in an official way as a reference for more serious actions, ie written warning, etc.  They should never be placed on a UPF and, IIRC are supposed to be destroyed upon the writing of the PER as any shortcomings or commendations contained in them are then official and they are no longer needed.

As for passing them to a new unit, I can only say that in 3 years working in the Records section in Esquimalt, I never once saw Div notes in anyones file.

How are they a "quick" reference" if they require the CO's authority to open them?  We are not talking about the current supervisor's working notes on his/her subordinates, but those that get sealed and forwarded as described above.

How would you have seen them in a file when it was repeatedly mentioned in this thread that they are kept separate from official files personnel files?

...are supposed to be destroyed upon the writing of the PER as any shortcomings or commendations contained in them are then official and they are no longer needed...

That is exactly the point, which is why the description of Div Notes as "sealed and forwarded" to a new unit on posting or change of jobs has been questioned.