PSEL 5 CDSB Gagetown - COR/COT file action/service standards?

[donaldk]

Hi all,

What are the EXPECTED (not the in practice) service standards/timelines expected for actioning a COT file at 5 CDSB Gagetown?  Who should I contact if I have issues that need to be investigated? (min Lt(N)/Capt - prefer Maj/LCdr). 

Last time I drafted a TRB file here in Halifax a couple years back, the service standard for PSEL branch to action a re-muster or release was 30 days from when a TRB/COT file was dropped on their laps.

Situation:
A family member of mine is currently on PAT in what is called the 'Hold Fast' platoon and was PRB'd (similar to a naval TRB) off their course about 8 months back.  Initially, the member was informed file action was started by CFSME and forwarded to Gagetown's PSEL officer.  Currently as it stands, no PRB minutes have been filed, and no file started at the local PSO, causing the member to miss out on any potential reassignment for this fiscal year. 

There are medical issues and that file was also left unactioned involved with this also - but that occurred late enough that the PRB/COT file processing should have taken place by CFSME and Gagetown's CDSB's PSO.

I have been advising the member to handle his affairs and given him support where I can, however, after discovering about files gone past 6 months without even being looked at is unacceptable. :facepalm:

If no meaningful answer can be provided in this forum or by PM my next step will be engaging the Ombudsman's office and seek their assistance at engaging CDA / PSEL / Medical branches to investigate handling of PATs at Gagetown.

 

[exgunnertdo]

I can't offer specific comments about the situation, except to add that a subordinate of my husband's had a big problem with the PSEL office in Gagetown a couple of years ago and the COT process in general (not as a PAT, but a Sgt with a medical COT). Poor guy is still quite bitter over it, because he's still suffering from some of the effects of it in his new trade.

As an intermediate step before CDA, PSEL branch, Medical branch, there is a CADTC PSO in Kingston who would be the "go-to" for all things Army PSO related. She's a Major. I won't post her name on a public forum, but PM me if you can't figure it out through the DWAN/CADTC SharePoint site.

I don't know how the process is managed specifically, but there is also a HQ that might be in the way. CFSME reports to CTC (Combat Training Centre). CFSME may have sent the file up and it got stuck at CTC. I don't know if the individual schools go straight to the PSO office or through CTC HQ. So that could be another stoppage in the process.

Good luck!

Edit to add - the Gagetown PSO wouldn't be "under" the CADTC PSO. Base PSO would report through Base to 5 Div to Army HQ in Ottawa. CTC and the schools report to CADTC HQ in Kingston. The Maj in Kingston is in the training/school stream. So not part of the Base PSO stream. But connected.

 

[donaldk]

I will look into this more come Monday and make some phone calls...  if I get nowhere I will send a PM your way.

As a side note, I did get to see the depressing rat hole called H3 where they keep the PATs housed.  I wonder who's behind at PMED or BCE was kissed to keep that building open, as it is clearly beyond its EOL.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Try hunting down the BTAGs, there should be a process there for pre-OFP PRB CT (Cease Trg) types.  FWIW, if they are CTd and recommended for a COR, they should be a PAD vice PAT.

WRT advising this mbr to contact the Ombudsman, and I am sure you know this but I add it as a reminder, http://www.ombudsman.forces.gc.ca/en/ombudsman-about-us/defence-admin-orders-directives.page for the mbr's awareness and consideration.

Attention drawn to the "Failure to Comply" statement and Para 13 (IIRC) of the full DAOD, the one on 'must use other mechanisms prior to the Ombudsman' part, such as the Grievance Process.

 

[donaldk]

A redress would be suitable if the member was outright denied something... in this case it is a systematic failure of processes not being executed.

Second note, yes this case is a PAD, I am used to using PAT verbally.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

A redress would be suitable if the member was outright denied something... in this case it is a systematic failure of processes not being executed.

Perhaps that would qualify as 'act or omission'?  Maybe if the mbr was to submit a NOI to Grieve (staffed properly) the CO would take notice and attempt to remedy.  Just a quick thought.  At least then the mbr has attempted 'lower level resolution'.

 

[donaldk]

<deleted irrelevant info>
Edit: Found a 2014 copy of BTAGs, nothing useful.  Waiting for a response back from MILPERSGEN/SEM1 BTL cell.  Updated correspondence to ref CANFORGEN 257/10.

Edit 2: Late night research found CANFORGEN 257/10 para 4.B.(2) applies in this case.  To summarize: From Cease Trg Date, 30 days to see PSO, and 90 days for file action to D Mil C 7, and retaining members on PAT/PAD beyond this shall cease (for most cases).  He has seen the PSO for a not so proper first interview, the PRB paperwork hasn't been finished though.

Thus as a CANFORGEN still in force isn't being followed, now I feel he has grounds to start an NOI for redress for deadlines being long exceeded, and by now subj member should have checked his Hotmail being the early riser he is.

Let the fireworks begin  >.