PERs : All issues questions...2003-2019

[exgunnertdo]

Found it!  Not sure of the interpretation, that's where Sun Life will have the answers, but on p.14 of the PSHCP Benefit Booklet, under Medical Practitioners benefit -

Eligible expenses are the reasonable and customary charges for:

• physician's services and laboratory services where such services are not eligible for reimbursement under the participant's provincial/territorial health insurance plan, but where such services would be eligible for reimbursement under one or more other provincial/territorial health insurance plans.

(more blah, blah in the book follows, but that's the gist of it).

 

[Strike]

If last year's publication of greivance results is any indication, IVF will NOT be covered for non-service women outside of those provinces that cover it (Ontario only covers it for women with dual tube blockages).

Best bet is to go unaccompanied until things take.

 

[Good2Golf]

For periods of not more than 6 months, an unaccompanied move is an option as opposed to IR.
It can be found under Section 11.2 of the IRP manual.

^ Consider this.


What it means is that your husband can move by himself to temporary accomodation at the new location for a period of six months, without question (it's built-in to the posting structure/policy), if the family/couple has not secured housing in the new location.  You would remain at the family's principal residence, in Quebec, covered under the Quebec Health Care Plan, and continue to be eligible for IVF.

Yes, you would both be living in two separate locations during that six-month period, but your husband would receive a "separation allowance" (meaning some costs covered by being away from the spouse and his principal residence) which would cover a portion of the cost to travel home as duty/distance would permit.

As the end of the first six-month period approached, you both could either then: a) move to the new posting location (and cease being covered for IVF), or b) you hsuband could request from his chain of command for approval of an "imposed restriction" (IR - meaning the member's dependant(s) and household goods and effects remains in the original residence) to the posting...extending coverage of separation allowance until such time as a full posting and purchase of home at the new posting location was done.

What you will both have to consider and weigh the advantages and disadvantages of, is whether it is worth the physical separation of potentially 6 months or more, to gain the IVF coverage -- that is a decision that only you two can make, in the end.

Hopefully the distances are such that whatever duration of separation is required, still works for the both of you.

Good luck.


Regards
G2G

 

[dogger1936]

Bit of a revival of a topic but I believe this best fit's here.

Just got word that there are some "issues" with my PER from my JPSU staff. Last year as a Sgt at my regiment I was MOI. I got posted into a WO job as a Sgt and thought I done a pretty bang on Job. Filling in a capt position and taking on many of his previous roles; frankly everyone seemed very very pleased with my work.

After prodding my Capt and Maj for a PDR through out the year nothing ever materialized.
There was a little disagreement between me and said Capt who attempted to charge me for insubordination. All charges were quickly dropped and I never recieved any warning charge or verbal anything IRT this situation.

Apparently my PER is very lacking compared to the year before. I am guessing I will now have to go through the grievance process. And very honestly with my illness and injury I am seriously stressed out pretty bad over this. Unfortunately an AO can't take my role as the griever which ends up adding a lot of unneeded unwarranted stress on my lap when I'm trying to recover. To me such an unwarranted non validated PER is close on harassment. However I could be wrong.

To note: I've never grieved anything in my career up till now. I have never been involved in any harassment complaints. Just figured I would add that as I am not "that" guy. I've always respected and learned from criticism and prided myself on always improving myself and my subordinates.

To me this seems like yet another backhand slap from the CIC world.

Would I have grounds for harassment in this case? Due to the fact I am at my wit's end with these people who seem hell bent on making my life as difficult as possible as I'm going through a rough time in my life.

Any suggestions, help, thoughts would be appreciated.

 

[aesop081]

You should note 2 things:

1) Multiple grievance board decisions have reinforced that one year's PER is not related to the previous year.

2) Multiple grievance board decisions have reinforced that a lack of initial PDRs or part 5 PDRs does not invalidate a PER.

I'm in the middle of dealing with an unhappy subordinate and I can say that, as a supervisor, it pays to read greivance case summaries on the board website.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

And to further add to what Cdn Aviator said, harassment is specifically defined in it's very own DAOD.  You would be well served to read that DAOD to see if it fits your particular situation.

If you feel that the PER is unfair, by all means- Grieve.  That is why the system exists.  Lay out your objections to your current PER logically and factually and you should have no issues.  Just make sure that you have read the CFPAS guidance first- that is what the Grievance Board will base it's decision on.

 

[Pusser]

You should note 2 things:

1) Multiple grievance board decisions have reinforced that one year's PER is not related to the previous year.

2) Multiple grievance board decisions have reinforced that a lack of initial PDRs or part 5 PDRs does not invalidate a PER.

I'm in the middle of dealing with an unhappy subordinate and I can say that, as a supervisor, it pays to read greivance case summaries on the board website.

You're right of course.  However, a supervisor is not allowed to hide poor leadership with these facts either.  To consistently ignore a subordinate's requests for guidance, direction, feedback, etc is unacceptable.  In my experience, it has always been a well accepted tenet that there should be no surprises on a PER.  In fact, in any unit I've ever been with, none of my bosses would ever have accepted negative comments on any PERs without evidence that the member had been apprised of the situation and given a chance to correct him/herself.

Can Dogger grieve the PER he's anticipating?  Yes, but keep in mind that a CF member can grieve the fact that the sun rises in the east; it doesn't mean he/she has a chance of winning.  A grievance against a PER, solely because it's a significant drop in score from previous PERs will not be successful.  In order to win a grievance of this nature, one has to show how the PER is not a true reflection of one's performance and/or potential.  In order to do this, one needs to document everything and be able to deconstruct the PER point by point and use concrete evidence to show why it isn't correct.  It's a lot of work, but it can be succesful.  It is correct that an AO cannot grieve on one's behalf, but a good AO can help you present your argument in a clear and unemotional manner.  Keep in mind that the griever can choose his/her AO (within reason).  If you have a former platoon or company commander with whom you have a good relationship, that may be a good place to start.  With all our modern means of communication (e.g. email) the need for you to be co-located with your AO is almost non-existent.

An harrassment complaint for abuse of authority or mistreatment should be dealt with separately.

 

[MJP]

Bit of a revival of a topic but I believe this best fit's here.

Just got word that there are some "issues" with my PER from my JPSU staff. Last year as a Sgt at my regiment I was MOI. I got posted into a WO job as a Sgt and thought I done a pretty bang on Job. Filling in a capt position and taking on many of his previous roles; frankly everyone seemed very very pleased with my work.

After prodding my Capt and Maj for a PDR through out the year nothing ever materialized.
There was a little disagreement between me and said Capt who attempted to charge me for insubordination. All charges were quickly dropped and I never recieved any warning charge or verbal anything IRT this situation.

Apparently my PER is very lacking compared to the year before. I am guessing I will now have to go through the grievance process. And very honestly with my illness and injury I am seriously stressed out pretty bad over this. Unfortunately an AO can't take my role as the griever which ends up adding a lot of unneeded unwarranted stress on my lap when I'm trying to recover. To me such an unwarranted non validated PER is close on harassment. However I could be wrong.

To note: I've never grieved anything in my career up till now. I have never been involved in any harassment complaints. Just figured I would add that as I am not "that" guy. I've always respected and learned from criticism and prided myself on always improving myself and my subordinates.

To me this seems like yet another backhand slap from the CIC world.

Would I have grounds for harassment in this case? Due to the fact I am at my wit's end with these people who seem hell bent on making my life as difficult as possible as I'm going through a rough time in my life.

Any suggestions, help, thoughts would be appreciated.

You are talking about two seperate but related issues here as noted by Pusser.

One is a redress of grievance and the other is a possible case of harrassment.

For the first I would suggest asking your CoC for an assisting officer.  Before that read the grievance website http://vcds.mil.ca/sites/page-eng.asp?page=4689, QR&O Chap 7 and as CA has pointed out find similar cases via the grievance board.  You can always put in a grievance it is your right just make sure your case is on solid ground.

For the second request a meeting with a harassment advisor to discuss the issue of harassment.  Another excellent resource is a Workplace Relations Advisor who can assist you along the way. 

In both cases stay calm & document things as objectively as possible.  Going in unprofessionally erodes a case regardless of its merits.

 

[aesop081]

  However, a supervisor is not allowed to hide poor leadership with these facts either.

I never said that.

In my experience, it has always been a well accepted tenet that there should be no surprises on a PER.

I agree. However, the CF grievance board has consistently sided with "lack of PDR does not invalidate a PER".

A grievance against a PER, solely because it's a significant drop in score from previous PERs will not be successful.

A fact that becomes quite evident if one were to read the case summaries on the grievance board's website. Hence why i pointed it out in my earlier post.

An harrassment complaint for abuse of authority or mistreatment should be dealt with separately.

Another point where the grievance board has been consistent.

 

[dogger1936]

Thanks for the info guys.

My CoC are taking care of this mess and this has already gone very high up the CoC already. It seem's they agree with my thoughts of whats going on. A CIC member who attempted to charge me earlier in the year was dead wrong and proven so. Then he is not being resigned this year and tries to "ruin" my career (haha) with a developing PER.

No charges no warnings no PDR's no issues brought up during the year. I went from a MOI PER to developing. In my eye's that's a issue.

The PER wasn't vetted or anything from the desk of the CIC Capt to my current boss. Spelling mistakes no mention of anything prior to being posted to the unit (april-July back at the regiment; that PDR was provided to them upon my posting with letter from CO)

I've been told to not worry about it. It will be sorted before a grievance.

 

[aesop081]

I went from a MOI PER to developing. In my eye's that's a issue.

It certainly sounds like you are getting the short end of the deal. That being said, if whoever wrote the PER can justify the "developing", what you received the previous year has no bearing. If they cannot justify it, your PER deserves to be changed but, again, you previous MOI also has no bearing.

A PER relates to your performance and potential only for the reporting period it is written for. Your grievance, should there be one, needs to focus on that reporting period.

Good luck.

 

[dogger1936]

It certainly sounds like you are getting the short end of the deal. That being said, if whoever wrote the PER can justify the "developing", what you received the previous year has no bearing. If they cannot justify it, your PER deserves to be changed but, again, you previous MOI also has no bearing.

A PER relates to your performance and potential only for the reporting period it is written for. Your grievance, should there be one, needs to focus on that reporting period.

Good luck.

Cheer's and understood reference the last year. Them finding justification is not gonna happen IMHO.

IRT the reporting period it should contain positions held at regiment for 4 months of that reporting period. BZ letter from the base commander being something that should be showing up there as well.

It was a poorly written attempt by a bitter little person. In the end it will mean more work for him and hopefully ( by the looks of things) none for me.

I have full support of my CoC to the highest level even before this matter was discussed with me; which is making this much easier.

 

[aesop081]

IRT the reporting period it should contain positions held at regiment for 4 months of that reporting period. BZ letter from the base commander being something that should be showing up there as well.

Indeed it should.

I know you understand WRT "last year vs this year" but some people out there just can't grasp that. Sorry if i seemed to tell you how to suck eggs.

 

[dogger1936]

Indeed it should.

I know you understand WRT "last year vs this year" but some people out there just can't grasp that. Sorry if i seemed to tell you how to suck eggs.

No not all brother. I'm new to this whole having issues IRT my reports. Usually there are never any surprises on PDR's or PER's for me. This one was mind blowing.

My platoon commander wasn't going to inform me and try to sort this out before I was brought into the picture; however some valid questions needed to be asked so my CO could have a fuller understanding of what the heck he was looking at.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

No not all brother. I'm new to this whole having issues IRT my reports. Usually there are never any surprises on PDR's or PER's for me. This one was mind blowing.

My platoon commander wasn't going to inform me and try to sort this out before I was brought into the picture; however some valid questions needed to be asked so my CO could have a fuller understanding of what the heck he was looking at.

rPM me if you do not get results.  I may know a few people.....

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Having the involvement of support of your higher CofC should (hopefully) sort this out for you before you need to engage the Grievance process and/or consider a formal harassment complaint.  But, in the event it doesn't, a few points and ref's that may help.

1.  Assisting Officers (AO) are related to Summary Proceeding.  (QR & O, Vol 2, Chap 108, Art 108.03 - Definitions and Art 108.14).

2.  Assisting Members (AM) are related to the CF Grievance Process.  (DGCFGA DIN and InterNet website)

3.  Assistants are related to the CF Harassment Prevention & Resolution system.  (A-PM-007-000/FP-001, CF Harassment Prevention & Resolution Guidelines, Part 3, Art 3.5 Assistants).

In the event the current COA doesn't resolve this for you and you go 'formal':

- Along with the DAOD on Harassment, the CA also uses LFCO 11-86 Workplace Conflict Prevention and Resolution along with the National directives and guidance.  If you engage a WRA/HA, this LFCO is something you should also review, as it is does a good job on amplifying the DAOD, Guidelines, etc.  It also provides the CA-specific processes. 

- If you do proceed with a formal complaint, I recommend your Assistant be WRA/HA trained (WRA/HA take the same trg).  They will be more familiar with the harassment process/system/practices and likely know where/how to access to your Formation level SOs/network, etc.

- If you do proceed with a formal grievance, you have the right to an Assisting Member.  However, remember that you are not limited to assistance just from that AM.  SMEs are invaluable and many are DND employees who are former serving mbrs with tons of knowledge.  Its easy to develop tunnel vision, they can help with 'seeing the bigger picture'.

- With either the grievance or harassment systems/processes, ADR is usually explored as a first step.  DAOD 5046-0 covers ADR, additionally there is a DIN ADR site, under the CMP org.  I think its worth reviewing and considering, as an ADR solution likely would involve FAR less time and 'drama' than either a formal grievance and/or harassment complaint.  You have lots on to go now it seems.  Early resolution is possible even after engaging the formal processes; processes which can be long, drawn out and involve significant investments in your time, emotions, etc. 

Really hope the current COA sorts this out, but if it doesn't and you need to proceed formally, hopefully those points and refs will help get you down the road with less effort & time.

 

[dogger1936]

rPM me if you do not get results.  I may know a few people.....

Thanks will do. Much appreciated.

Having the involvement of support of your higher CofC should (hopefully) sort this out for you before you need to engage the Grievance process and/or consider a formal harassment complaint.  But, in the event it doesn't, a few points and ref's that may help.

1.  Assisting Officers (AO) are related to Summary Proceeding.  (QR & O, Vol 2, Chap 108, Art 108.03 - Definitions and Art 108.14).

2.  Assisting Members (AM) are related to the CF Grievance Process.  (DGCFGA DIN and InterNet website)

3.  Assistants are related to the CF Harassment Prevention & Resolution system.  (A-PM-007-000/FP-001, CF Harassment Prevention & Resolution Guidelines, Part 3, Art 3.5 Assistants).

In the event the current COA doesn't resolve this for you and you go 'formal':

- Along with the DAOD on Harassment, the CA also uses LFCO 11-86 Workplace Conflict Prevention and Resolution along with the National directives and guidance.  If you engage a WRA/HA, this LFCO is something you should also review, as it is does a good job on amplifying the DAOD, Guidelines, etc.  It also provides the CA-specific processes. 

- If you do proceed with a formal complaint, I recommend your Assistant be WRA/HA trained (WRA/HA take the same trg).  They will be more familiar with the harassment process/system/practices and likely know where/how to access to your Formation level SOs/network, etc.

- If you do proceed with a formal grievance, you have the right to an Assisting Member.  However, remember that you are not limited to assistance just from that AM.  SMEs are invaluable and many are DND employees who are former serving mbrs with tons of knowledge.  Its easy to develop tunnel vision, they can help with 'seeing the bigger picture'.

- With either the grievance or harassment systems/processes, ADR is usually explored as a first step.  DAOD 5046-0 covers ADR, additionally there is a DIN ADR site, under the CMP org.  I think its worth reviewing and considering, as an ADR solution likely would involve FAR less time and 'drama' than either a formal grievance and/or harassment complaint.  You have lots on to go now it seems.  Early resolution is possible even after engaging the formal processes; processes which can be long, drawn out and involve significant investments in your time, emotions, etc. 

Really hope the current COA sorts this out, but if it doesn't and you need to proceed formally, hopefully those points and refs will help get you down the road with less effort & time.

Thanks for the info. And your absolutely right; I don't have the energy or mindset to be dealing with this stuff right now. Which is the reason they are doing it IMHO. I'm at a bit of a undecided factor in regards to the harassment complaint. I really don't want to be stuck in the process; but I do really want to get this member labelled and recognized for what he is all the same. I've never been involved in any side of the harassment complaint; however it looks time and labour intensive from what I've seen from the sidelines back at the regiment.

 

[Staff Weenie]

There's an interesting quandary raised by PERs for personnel suffering from an OSI. I received my PER before I went on sick leave, and my supervisor told me it was one of the hardest he's ever written in 30 some-odd years. The scores went from walk on water to mostly mid-range, but the narrative was still very glowing. He said he found it extremely difficult to rate my actual performance. Sadly I actually agreed.... I've joked over the last year that I'd have fired my ass long ago. How do you objectively rate performance on somebody who can't remember what happened 10 minutes ago, and at times accomplishes only an hour's worth of work in a day? Or is on reduced work hours to two to three days per week?

I haven't read over the CFPAS manual since last year, but it is an area which I don't believe is touched upon, as I don't think it falls under the category for an outright PER exemption.

I'm not raising this for my sake, but because I know this is an issue that impacts many people every year, including some members of this site. The question is, accepting that your subordinate has an OSI, do you rate their performance within the spectrum of what they can realistically achieve at this time during their recovery and treatment? Would it still be fair to rank them against their peers?

I'm rather interested to hear what others have to say.

As for myself, I have a good relationship with my supervisor, and I'm not going to grieve my PER - I know it was a crappy year for me - instead, I'll just focus on the positive commentary. Maybe it'll let me show 'dramatic improvement' for next year.....

 

[armyvern]

Thanks will do. Much appreciated.

Thanks for the info. And your absolutely right; I don't have the energy or mindset to be dealing with this stuff right now. Which is the reason they are doing it IMHO. I'm at a bit of a undecided factor in regards to the harassment complaint. I really don't want to be stuck in the process; but I do really want to get this member labelled and recognized for what he is all the same. I've never been involved in any side of the harassment complaint; however it looks time and labour intensive from what I've seen from the sidelines back at the regiment.

Interestingly, I recd a request today to act as an AM for a PER grievance happening in another Command. The request is supported by the CoC.

Good luck with your process; I wish you well.

 

[armyvern]

There's an interesting quandary raised by PERs for personnel suffering from an OSI....

I've told my supervisors to treat them as per normal. Much like a pers who is on MATA or PATA (ie away from the workplace for extended periods), I expect a honest assessment of their performance while they were at work.  As far as I'm concerned, being on 1/2 days due to OSI etc, or other means that you don't deduct for how they did not perform while excused from the workplace, but rather you assess them fairly on how they did perform while at work.

If dude/dudette was at work for 1/2 days for the past year, but did an excellent job during those 1/2 days - they are to be assessed as having done that excellent job. So far, all of my supervisors seem to have gotten it and I haven't experienced any issues regarding submitted grievances or unfair write-ups. Knock, knock, knock.