You need to be very careful here! You need to ask yourself whether or not the issuing of an IC would be more appropriate based on the circumstances? You really want to stay away from "adhoc" forms such as the one you are looking to implement.
My recommendation based on the limited info that you have provided and if you wish to have some sort of "record" to fall back on at a later date, then why not just conduct a "PDR Feedback Session" with the member and annotate the conduct deficiency on that? This way you NOW have a record, complete with signatures, which can be used at a later date.
IC is the only recognized form.
Verbal and written warnings are now IC's.
So you want to be sure the situation really warrants an IC.
Most times extra "training" and PER's can settle things out.
Are you doing a DI? If so, you can PM me your email addy and I can send you the UDI course package inclusive of Cautioned Statement Forms, Supplementary Question Forms, Witness Forms and Summary of Findings.
Are you doing a DI? If so, you can PM me your email addy and I can send you the UDI course package inclusive of Cautioned Statement Forms, Supplementary Question Forms, Witness Forms and Summary of Findings.
I have a feeling that the CSM expects him to do a UDI, but he has neither the course nor the experience. Shit, I've had a WO recently say to me when I said, "Did you caution her?" ... "What's a caution?" An f'n WO. Can you say that people with lack of experience are getting promoted way too quickly these days?
Well. it could be a mere 5B requirement, but that is administrative vice disciplinary. I assume that he at least knows the difference between administrative and "disciplinary" (his word). Perhaps not though given this day and age.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.