PERs : All issues questions...2003-2019
- Thread starter sgtdixon
- Start date
- Status
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 5,805
- Points
- 1,160
Maybe it's time we stopped basing promotions off arbitrary assessments, vague examples of performance and the all powerful boys club and start actually testing people to see if they possess the academics, experience and job skill to be promoted.
- Reaction score
- 9
- Points
- 530
Technically, we do that (for NCMs at all appointments/ranks and Officers at some ranks), which is why when people are promoted without the requisite courses formally required for that promotion, they are designated as Acting Lacking and the promotion is not substantive until such time as those courses are completed. If an AL goes on the course and fails it, or declines the course for personal reasons, an AR is supposed to be done with the probable outcome being loss of the promotion. For those who attend the career course(s) prior to promotion, the course report is supposed to be part of the National Merit board and have influence on the national ranking but, at least in my trade, the course reports have become so generic that they are pointless for that purpose.Jarnhamar said:
Even if we did away with AL and increased the weight of the course report at the national board, you would still need some mechanism to decide who merits attending those career courses though...and that would devolve back to the PER and the national ranking. Unless you re-institute things such as the pre-JLC/pre-ISCC and use those to determine who goes but then you circle back around to trying to figure out who merits attending the pre-course in order to qualify for the course.
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 5,805
- Points
- 1,160
I can only speak for the infantry but we get promoted if we have the required courses, required time in, and merit high enough with the boys.
What I'm talking about is taking all the members in line for a potential promotion, sitting them in a room, and giving them an exam tailored to their job. I'm not talking about giving people points for speaking french but for knowing the 17 steps of battle proceedure. What's involved in a section attack. Procedure for arresting someone etc..
Kind of like how the Americans do it to promote people. Promote someone because they scored a 98% on their exam for the rank of Sgt not because so and so is a good dude and supports the mess.
What I'm talking about is taking all the members in line for a potential promotion, sitting them in a room, and giving them an exam tailored to their job. I'm not talking about giving people points for speaking french but for knowing the 17 steps of battle proceedure. What's involved in a section attack. Procedure for arresting someone etc..
Kind of like how the Americans do it to promote people. Promote someone because they scored a 98% on their exam for the rank of Sgt not because so and so is a good dude and supports the mess.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Jarnhamar said:
The only problem with that is that the American's will promote people if they score above X threshold and worry about finding them a job at their new rank later. We being a small military can't do that, so even if you score well on a test, it's no better than getting that MOI, if there are no positions you are still not getting promoted...
- Reaction score
- 3,536
- Points
- 1,160
If you're going to do that, give troops the ammo to practice.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 210
no kidding, got guys coming to the range, given 20 rounds to zero and then expected to fire PWT 1,2, and 3.....with no practice since the last year they fired the same thing and had the same results.....usually a fail.
One thing that we need more of is tons of shooting practice, GOOD coaching from trained professionals, not just people they could drum up for range staff.
But trying to to get all that is like an act of god.
Shouldn't be on the PER especially when the member has no control over it.
One thing that we need more of is tons of shooting practice, GOOD coaching from trained professionals, not just people they could drum up for range staff.
But trying to to get all that is like an act of god.
Shouldn't be on the PER especially when the member has no control over it.
- Reaction score
- 3,536
- Points
- 1,160
Visualization is supposed to work wonders. We should include a mandatory week of sitting in a dark, silent room visualizing being able to for in the range and hitting your target. Everyone will pass then, and hate ibts even more.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 360
MCG said:
PWT could be included if it's a key technical aspect of that persons job. While shooting the C7 is an annual qualification it us of far less importance to pilots, mars o, finance, etc vice an infantry soldier. Perhaps a better mode would be to gave each trade officially identify technical/tactical aspects of huge job that must be covered by all units in the trade to create a common base of technical/tactical skills instead of unit "a" and unit "b" crating different evaluation criteria (which happens a lot).
As for the lack of ammo for the pwt's, the cfosp states that all soldiers should qualify to a standard 1 lower than mandated in the lfco on a sat range. No bullets required, and the system can measure breathing, weapon cant, etc for good shooting principle instruction.
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
In our community, all aircrew do C7 and 9mm. As well as CBRN, FA,Nav, comms, and a whole other pile of readiness and currency requirements that are common to all in addition to our MOSID specific requirements.
There is already plenty to be captured in a PER, now with the new writing guidance NONE of it is captured in annual assessments.
There is already plenty to be captured in a PER, now with the new writing guidance NONE of it is captured in annual assessments.
- Reaction score
- 1,646
- Points
- 1,190
Eye In The Sky said:
Round the fleet, refresher training does NOT get included in a PER. It does not count as "New Qualifications", nor does it affect your Performance and Potential factors, or merit any mention in the narratives. Because you simply receive a "pass/fail" (and almost always pass), you can't assess someones performance or potential on it.
This includes C8 and Sig Sauer refresher, Flood Trg, Fire Fighting Trg, Sea Survival, First Aid, and CBRN.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
I am currently using the CFPAS program to complete some PER's and am having some problems with the help file. Specifically, I can't open it, when I click on help nothing happens (the help file is also suppose to open automatically when I open the program but that doesn't happen either)... Has anyone had this problem before and found a way to fix it?
- Status
Similar threads
