PDA

View Full Version : What to do about EPRs, its so obvious, nobody thought of it



veritas
09-18-2013, 02:45 AM
.................................................. .................................

BOSS302
09-18-2013, 06:40 AM
Wait for it...the answer is NO EPRS!!!!

Here me out, Good, average, bad...all EPRs result from actions taken over the course of the year, whether it good or bad..the final result being written down in some elaborate piece of fluff is irrelevant, what matters is the actions taken during that year. I already know what you are thinking...how will the best of the best be recognized, and how will the dirt bags be kicked out...the answer again is simple....the same way they are now...dirt bags will still get paperwork, they will still get kicked out the same way as before....supervisors, shirts, commanders will still review the PIF before allowing reenlistment's....and those who are superb will also have proof in the form of monthly, quarterly, yearly awards....some of you are going to say, the awards program is nothing but fluff..and you are right, but so are EPRs, so what difference does it make.

What purpose does the EPR serve? NONE...its all fluff, its all hyped up events that all borderline falsifying govt documents. GET RID OF THEM!! Those who don't need to be promoted or allowed to reenlist will still not be allowed to do those things...those who can reenlist and promote...will just as they do now.


Just think about it, everyone will agree with me.


http://www.alaskainfo.org/sites/default/files/images/Guy%20Fly%20FIshing.jpg

BRUWIN
09-18-2013, 02:23 PM
You cannot not have EPRs. There are a whole slew of people who's employment depends on reviewing EPRs, sending them back blood red because the raters are stupid and they are amazingly smart, and showcasing their amazing work ethic by identifying raters late with EPRs at staff meetings and explaining to the CC how hard their job is trying to get these people to write these things.

Yes folks, changing or getting rid of the old EPR system won't be easy because you have these red tape, non- ACRONYM approving sumbitches whose livelihood depends on utilizing the current process to make their living. If a new system does come along that is simple, these will be the same people that will invent rules on the fly and turn it into a laborious writing lesson that will totally destroy the intention of implementing a new system. It will be two years tops before these people have the system back to where it will depend on them to actually make it work.

71Fish
09-18-2013, 02:40 PM
I've always thought to only count the most recent EPR. Many people change over the years, "mostly" for the better. Why should a rating (good or bad) you had as a SrA have any bearing on your selection to SMSgt or Chief?

BRUWIN
09-18-2013, 02:49 PM
I've always thought to only count the most recent EPR. Many people change over the years, "mostly" for the better. Why should a rating (good or bad) you had as a SrA have any bearing on your selection to SMSgt or Chief?

E-8/E-8 boards don't see SrA reports unless they are a really fast burner. Which is why I always had a big problem when people turned these SrA reports into writing lessons.

akruse
09-18-2013, 02:56 PM
E-8/E-8 boards don't see SrA reports unless they are a really fast burner. Which is why I always had a big problem when people turned these SrA reports into writing lessons.

Or listening to a SrA tell you how you are "killing their career" by doing such and such.

71Fish
09-18-2013, 03:05 PM
E-8/E-8 boards don't see SrA reports unless they are a really fast burner. Which is why I always had a big problem when people turned these SrA reports into writing lessons.

I wasn't aware of that. Still, people make big changes as the years go by. I guess there is no real correct answer. Performance has to be captured, I think everyone would agree to that. But how much info is enough, too much or too little?

SomeRandomGuy
09-18-2013, 03:23 PM
I'm warming up to this idea.

The company I work for has a firm policy that there are NO ANNUAL REVIEWS on employees.

It seems to work...of course, we are not competing for promotion across a nationwide system, but still...people are just as motivated simply by their boss telling them what to do.

My company does annual reports which mean basically nothing. In theory they are used to evaluate employees for possible merit raises or promotions but mostly they are just a record of what the employee did that year. They ask the employee to more or less write it. The supervisor uses the employee's comments to make a rating and edits or makes any changes they want. It gets reviewed by the supervisor's boss and then it is signed by employee and supervisor and they talk about it. The funny thing is that is has such little meaning the whole process from cradle to grave probably involves less than 1 hour per report (actual time spent on it by anyone in the chain). I kind of like the system. It is not really an evaluation it is more like writing a quick resume every year as to what you do for the company. It is simple and there is no real process so you can write it however you want.

71Fish
09-18-2013, 03:29 PM
I don't it has to be captured in words; perhaps in pictures.

The people I wrote on all would have received bad ratings if they had to rely on my drawing.

SomeRandomGuy
09-18-2013, 03:52 PM
Give supervisors a digital camera, route the troops best photo of the the year through email, done!

Photo's can also be used for boards, no need to meet or review packages, just email photos to board, done!

That just doesn't sound fair. In the current system you get screwed because your supervisor is a shitty writer. Now you get screwed because your supervisor is a shitty photographer.

P.S. I think AFMC tested your idea out a few years ago. If I'm not mistaken there was a CMSgt running the program. Guzzy? Gerzy? His name was something like that. I can't remember at the moment.

imported_DannyJ
09-18-2013, 04:28 PM
Horrible idea. Just. Horrible.

jondstewart
09-22-2013, 10:38 PM
I've said it before, but will say it again: have our enlisted promotion system like the officers and do away with EPR's! SSgt at 4, 5, or 6 years to make it, with 5 being the norm. If you don't make it, you're out after 7 years. TSgt at 9, 10, and 11 years, with 10 being the norm. If you don't make it, you get the boot at 12 years! MSgt at 14, 15, and 16 years. If you don't make it, you retire as a TSgt at 20 unless you get out early. SMSgt at 18, 19, and 20 years. CMsgt at 23, 24, and 25 years You can stay in up to 24 as a MSgt, 28 as a SMSgt, and 30 as a CMSgt.

If a person doesn't make E5 to E7, it's because there's been blemishes on their performance, behavior, or leadership. If they don't make E8 or E9, they're just not part of the chosen few who are truly outstanding

Chief_KO
09-23-2013, 12:25 AM
I've said it before, but will say it again: have our enlisted promotion system like the officers and do away with EPR's! SSgt at 4, 5, or 6 years to make it, with 5 being the norm. If you don't make it, you're out after 7 years. TSgt at 9, 10, and 11 years, with 10 being the norm. If you don't make it, you get the boot at 12 years! MSgt at 14, 15, and 16 years. If you don't make it, you retire as a TSgt at 20 unless you get out early. SMSgt at 18, 19, and 20 years. CMsgt at 23, 24, and 25 years You can stay in up to 24 as a MSgt, 28 as a SMSgt, and 30 as a CMSgt.

If a person doesn't make E5 to E7, it's because there's been blemishes on their performance, behavior, or leadership. If they don't make E8 or E9, they're just not part of the chosen few who are truly outstanding

You do realize the officer promotion system has a whole separate document called the PRF that makes the EPR a walk in the park by comparison.