View Full Version : JPA Hits Back
Major Geek
07-12-2006, 08:40
Just reading about the introduction of JPA Appraisals, did you know this:
....all personnel should be aware that the award of an Overall Performance Grade (OPG) of D (performance that is below the standard expected in most, or all, respects) in a JPA Appraisal triggers a separate JPA process whereby the Subject’s next pay increment is automatically suspended.
Bluntend
07-12-2006, 08:50
Is that legal?
Crystal_Tips
07-12-2006, 08:51
I have been surpisingly un-bothered by JPA but I can't see how this is fair. A paper could make a story worthy of page 6, maybe even page 5 out of this one ::/:
PeanutPhil
07-12-2006, 09:09
How can it not be fair. If you are so crap at your job that you get an overall performance grade of D you deserve a pay cut not a pay freeze!!
tommo9999
07-12-2006, 09:26
How can it not be fair. If you are so crap at your job that you get an overall performance grade of D you deserve a pay cut not a pay freeze!!
Couldn't agree more. If you are rubbish, you don't get the next increment. For too long we've been paying everyone the same way without any real quality check. Bring it on.
Rectifier
07-12-2006, 09:27
Good comment and I agree but has anyone ever seen such a bad performance grade? I've done many many 6000's and never had to give one that bad.
tommo9999
07-12-2006, 09:35
Now may be the time for every manager to truly assess their personnel. No more "Just give him a Rec to keep him sweet" rubbish. If he isn't up to the job, hit him where it hurts, in the pocket.
Shinyscot
07-12-2006, 12:25
This has always went on - with the F6000 if you get an overall performance in post score of 1, you get the Staish as 3rd RO, and no anuual incremental progression. If you are really that $hit, then why should you be paid more?
Soon To Leave
07-12-2006, 14:23
This assumes that the appraisal is accurate of course.
I can't see how a person can be financially penalised without some form of appeal and arbitration process.
The 1st RO could use the threat of no increment as a form of bullying or in pursuit of sexual favours for instance.
Anyone who isn't up to the job should be offered retraining or be kicked out.
In some cases it is the quality of supervision/management that is to blame for poor performance of a subordinate. Maybe they should be punished to the same or higher extent.
:raf:
shiny_arse
07-12-2006, 14:39
The exact same arguments were being circulated when the 6000 replaced the old 6442, especially when Pay 2000 eventually got up and running and people started to pay closer attention to their pay rather than the old percentage increase each year.
To be honest, has anyone actually heard of someone having their increment barred because he/she is a total biff and spends more time on jankers than at work.
tommo9999
07-12-2006, 15:36
Anyone who isn't up to the job should be offered retraining or be kicked out.
:raf:
That happens now - Pers who are unsuitable/unable to do their job (And subject to recommendation) can attend the Trade Reselection Centre to try and remuster.
Boarderlyne
07-12-2006, 21:42
In 15 years in the mob, I have only ever see one and I mean one report where the Overall Performance in Grade meant a visit to the Staish. There are not handed out lightly and I do agree that they should be linked to the increment. If you can't even show your boss that you are trying hard, then you deserve to lose money.
woollymouse
08-12-2006, 20:42
Just reading about the introduction of JPA Appraisals, did you know this:
....all personnel should be aware that the award of an Overall Performance Grade (OPG) of D (performance that is below the standard expected in most, or all, respects) in a JPA Appraisal triggers a separate JPA process whereby the Subject’s next pay increment is automatically suspended.
No different to the current F6000 system where an overall performance of 1 stops the pay increment. Are you in that category Geek?
woollymouse
08-12-2006, 20:43
Good comment and I agree but has anyone ever seen such a bad performance grade? I've done many many 6000's and never had to give one that bad.
I've seen several, I was a Stn F6000 Clk however, no none of them were mine.
woollymouse
08-12-2006, 20:48
This assumes that the appraisal is accurate of course.
I can't see how a person can be financially penalised without some form of appeal and arbitration process.
The 1st RO could use the threat of no increment as a form of bullying or in pursuit of sexual favours for instance.
Anyone who isn't up to the job should be offered retraining or be kicked out.
In some cases it is the quality of supervision/management that is to blame for poor performance of a subordinate. Maybe they should be punished to the same or higher extent.
:raf:
Believe me there are people out there who are that bad and who refuse to take the walk, the Air Force is an Equal Opportunities employer and as such can not kick out someone who has trained to do the job, but who is unable or unwilling to make the minimum effort.
Those F6000's I've seen that have been overall 1 have not been innaccurate the guy's have genuinely bad at the task they were trained to do.
Major Geek
09-12-2006, 11:39
No different to the current F6000 system where an overall performance of 1 stops the pay increment. Are you in that category Geek?
Cheeky git. I am one of Her Majesty's finest SNCOs.
Top comment by Soon To Leave
" Anyone who isn't up to the job should be offered retraining or be kicked out.
In some cases it is the quality of supervision/management that is to blame for poor performance of a subordinate. Maybe they should be punished to the same or higher extent."
Crystal_Tips
09-12-2006, 21:21
It's a great policy hardly practised as most assessors don't want the hassle of creating this situation. Most know the sh*t workers on your sections and you either ignore them or shield them to get through the day on the hope they'll PVR or be posted soon. This is a reporting chain problem that needs to be addressed. If I'm wrong how come there aren't more people given these low grades?
What we need is confrontation and the return of the CPL to what it was 20 years ago to take some of the heat off the snec!!
The exact same arguments were being circulated when the 6000 replaced the old 6442, especially when Pay 2000 eventually got up and running and people started to pay closer attention to their pay rather than the old percentage increase each year.
To be honest, has anyone actually heard of someone having their increment barred because he/she is a total biff and spends more time on jankers than at work.
yes i have, there was a JT on my sqn who was stuck at level 7 and couldn't move up to level 8 due to the fact he didn't get recommended on his 6000. to be fair he was a bit of a pratt and never listened to advice from his 6 month interim that said if he didn't start doing his job and bitching about everyone else, turn up on time and basically be part of the team, then he wasn't gonna get his pay rise.... low and behold that's exactly what happened. he got held back for a year and bitched and moaned about it like you wouldn't believe.
It's a great policy hardly practised as most assessors don't want the hassle of creating this situation. Most know the sh*t workers on your sections and you either ignore them or shield them to get through the day on the hope they'll PVR or be posted soon. This is a reporting chain problem that needs to be addressed. If I'm wrong how come there aren't more people given these low grades?
What we need is confrontation and the return of the CPL to what it was 20 years ago to take some of the heat off the snec!!
I don't know how much things have changed but I seem to remember that the effort required to get someone admin discharged was such a pain in the @rse that it rarely happened, trying to find a zob to support it wasn't easy either.
Tashy_Man
10-12-2006, 20:12
Most know the sh*t workers on your sections and you either ignore them or shield them to get through the day on the hope they'll PVR or be posted soon.
The problem is that it's this type of person that will make it. All the "good" workers who should be getting the good assesments (and most are getting the same as crap ones) are PVRing because they see no future....it happened recently, an SAC (T) PVR'd the same day he was offered his tapes (after being in approx 5 years !!!) It took me 5 frigging years to get my fitters course !!!
Also recently we had a J/T who was one of the best workers on the sqn, was timex after 9 years and in his last week of work they offered him his tapes.....he now has a nice £40,000 job and the RAF has yet again lost out.
What we need is confrontation and the return of the CPL to what it was 20 years ago to take some of the heat off the snec!![/quote]
Nice thought but it will never happen....I still remember how a cpl used to be respected now we are treated as about equal to an sac.......
Crack on this time next year, i'll have finished from this crock o sh1t :PDT_Xtremez_09:
SgtScribbly
10-12-2006, 20:40
Pay2000 was introduced in accordance with the government policy on performance related pay
You dont have to be good to get your increment, just satisfactory. If your perfomance over the reporting year has been unsatisfactory then you quite rightly do not received your increment
SgtScribbly
10-12-2006, 20:44
Not a lot of people know that admin discharge is also a lot easier now. The decision now can effectively be made at Stn Cdr (admitedly endorsed at Cmd) level to give an amdin burden the boot.
Not a lot of people know that admin discharge is also a lot easier now. The decision now can effectively be made at Stn Cdr (admitedly endorsed at Cmd) level to give an amdin burden the boot.
One time, and only time, in my career I and a fellow Cpl was asked by a Chief whether I thought someone was ready for promo (time, JT to Cpl). The answer was no and it was delayed by a year. That man had spine, but thereafter towards the end of my time it seems that the climate of redress, or the threat of it, prevented people from clamping down.
In the early nineties we had a linie who was frankly dangerous. After nearly a year he was still not passed out to work without supervision, despite being sent off for an assim course not normally given to linie's already on type. The course report on him recommended 'a further period of in-service training' so we in the training cell were straight on the SEngO's back to get him binned...he got posted - Somebody Else's Problem. Met one of his Halton instructors who told me they'd tried binning him at the airfields stage - no dice, too far through training. Would he be binned now or offered retraining? Can people now remuster 'down' for non-medical reasons?
SgtScribbly
11-12-2006, 00:24
Can people now remuster 'down' for non-medical reasons?
Down?
Read the sentence without that word in it, it still makes sense but sounds so much less condescending.
Down?
Read the sentence without that word in it, it still makes sense but sounds so much less condescending.
The reason I put it that way was due to my understanding that it was not possible to remuster to a TG lower than the persons current TG, unless medical reasons precluded continuance in the persons current TG. It was not meant to be condescending, just poor sentence structure.
I knew a lad who 'remustered' from Carpenter (TG?) to A Mech (TG1) because they were binning the trade, and when they decided against it asked to return to his original trade. Although he hadn't completed trade training he was not allowed back - reason, as above regarding remustering 'down'.
Not having been a scribbly, or in a remuster situation, I may be barking up the wrong tree so happy to be corrected if wrong.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.