Advice on SJAR comments

[chumpzilla]

A bit of a daft title, I know! Basically, one of the Sgt's has come to me in a fit of rage over their SJAR! Said individual doesn't want the assessment, and so refuses to sign it. They said they'd rather not have one! A knee jerk reaction, methinks, but nevertheless the person came to me with a right bee in their bonnet!

Has anyone had a member of their staff come and ask for advice reference said problem? The person at question is a good worker but can come across quite brash and "unpolished"!

Trouble is, everyone is either not interested or doesn't want to touch it with a barge pole. A bit unfair because it could be a real career stopper...

My approach is going to be to pull out the bits they aren't happy with and discuss what they can do change them. Aaaaaargh!

Any experiences of similar issues would probably help in my directing/advice giving!

[andgo]

If you wrote it honestly, and believe your assessment, why change it? Just grow some:E

2RO can always disagree with you although its worth discussing it with them before you go to press.

[Inspector Dreyfuss]

Do not be bullied into changing anything if your comments are fair and true reflections of the individual's performance. Above all though, take advice from your one up and/or P1 staff.

[ProfessionalStudent]

Chump

Were they counselled about the bad bits during their mid-term? If they were, then it's his tough luck if he hasn't addressed (or tried) the problems. If they weren't counselled, then the 1st RO should take look at him/herself.

Either way, I wouldn't change it. It's not a popularity contest and it will probably help him/her in the long run.

[Mystic Greg]

See my PM, but while I was writing it some good advice came in above, none of which I disagree with.

[Stitchbitch]

As above, if these 'bits' you're pulling out were in thier mid term and haven't bothered to do anything about them (family and personality clashes permitting) then they realy haven't got a leg to stand on. Mid terms are for 'course correction' and often involve (in my own recieving end experience) some points to work on. If they show NO improvement over six months and taking into account any 'outside influences' then they haven't tried very hard and can't complain. They had the six monthly brief, they should know the score.

Please be aware though that you will deal with 'career stopper assesments' and that what you do next will affect 'they's' life. Please examine all options open to you.:ok:

[C130 Techie]

Agree with above.

Also I think I am correct in saying that if the subject comments on the 1st RO's appraisal then the 2nd RO must address those comments.

Secondly on the old 6442/6000 system the subject was not signing to accept the assessment/appraisal but was signing to say that he had been interviewed. See no reason for this not to be the same with the SJAR.

[Melchett01]

Agree with all of the above - probably will have to remember it myself as I am anticipating a similar issue later this year with one of our SNCOs.

However, I must correct one misconception. It is not your sgt's appraisal, it is your appraisal (or whoever wrote it) of them. Whether they like it or not, it is not for them to accept or refuse it. If it is an honest appraisal, it will stand on its own when it reaches further up the chain. Plus your sgt is not signing to say that he agrees with the report, merely that he has seen it and has been de-briefed on it, a common straw to clutch at when the subject feels agrieved.

Either way, I don't envy you!

[glad rag]

Were they counselled about the bad bits during their mid-term? :hmm::hmm:

[golf 8 delta]

Chump,

All the above comments are valid, especially mid term counselling. However, having sat on 2 prom boards in the last 18 months there is a significant lack of morale courage being shown by some ROs with poor report writing and an inability to demonstrate performance with specific examples. We need to know the good and the bad to make an informed decision, not some bland drivel that a 4 year old could write.

Best stick to your guns with the report so long as you have followed all the advice above.

G8D

[L1A2 discharged]

as said above, its your appraisal of the subject.

There is no choice about whether or not the want to 'sign' it electrically, the subject can use the comments box to refute anything if they choose to.

Refer them to P1 for some career guidance on obeying lawful instructions, I expected all 'my' SNCOs to be able to stand up for themselves when necessary but it appears that this subject did not take in the SJAR lesson on promotion courses.

Also as above, if its true leave it in, if were happy when you wrote it don't be swayed.

[On_The_Top_Bunk]

Were they counselled about the bad bits during their mid-term? :hmm::hmm:

Anyone actually had or done a mid-term?

[Clockwork Mouse]

Some sensible advice above, but why are you looking for advice on a public chat forum? Don't you have a formed unit with an organised structure, chain of command and people whose job it is to supervise and advise you on questions like this?

[sisemen]

Back in 1369 days I had occasion to write an ACR on one of my junior officers who had been counselled at length about her performance but to no avail. She seemed surprised when the ACR was presented and floods of tears were the result. Same effect with the 2nd RO who backed me. Then it went to the Staish and she requested a special interview with him.

I was then asked if I would change the report. I refused. Staish backed my stand but then ruined it by writing some wishy-washy comments as 3rd RO. :ugh:

[c130jbloke]

All of the above advice is spot on. Bottom line is that if he is a tw@t, then you must report it as such. On one occasion I had to write an AAR that was dripping in the subject's blood - not pleasant, but as somebody said earlier, there is too much spineless tosh being written. And if everybody were to brutally honest, them promotion boards would get a lot easier.

Stick to the truth - as you (and other supervisors - you write it but don't be afraid to ask for other opinions) see it.

[Earsling]

"Anyone actually had or done a mid-term?"

I do them all the time. 99% are verbal at the six monthly point. You know who the strokers are so they get a proper written interim assessment pointing out what's going wrong. If, at the Annual theres no improvement then they get the full broadside with bells and whistles on.

Stick by your convictions and ask yourself "Can this person be an effective CT/FS".

[Biggus]

If the mods are going to get upset about threads being copied from e-goat then this is one, see:

Advice on SAC SJAR comments - E-Goat :: The Totally Unofficial Royal Air Force Rumour Network forums (http://www.e-goat.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=24479)

Only on e-goat it is an SAC who is unhappy with his SJAR!

[Cows getting bigger]

Sitting out here in civvi street, remind the chap that such discussions out here often result in a P45. Tell him to stop being so stupid, sign the SJAR as having been debriefed, remind him he has a 'suicide box' and then pre-warn the 2nd RO that a 20 minutes-before-happy-hour set of comments may not be good enough.