PDA

View Full Version : Removing PIF Paperwork



weezy
03-25-2014, 04:44 PM
So I have had an LOR in my PIF for four years come this June. This LOR has gone through two CC's and I can't count how many 1st Sergeants. Every year my supervisor asks to have it removed and my leadership says they won't. I have looked at every records AFI there is and I have found nothing on PIF paperwork removal. Is there ANY route (chain of command/legal) I can take to try and have this LOR removed or do I have to wait until hell freezes over?

I know everybody is going to ask so... I got the LOR because a couple of co-workers were doing spice and I didn't report them. I got it. I fucked up and should have done something. Can I move on now.

Another little note. I applied for AF Honor Guard two and a half years ago and my then CC denied my package because of this LOR and I'm looking at applying again, but I'm not going to go through the whole package making process if my CC is just going to deny it again.

SomeRandomGuy
03-25-2014, 06:14 PM
I could be wrong on this but as far as I know PIFs do not officially exist anymore. That's not to say that squadrons have not taken the initiative to create their own "PIF" and maybe they are passing those along from commander to commander. With that being said nothing in the file is official and there isn't any regulation that can make them get rid of the file. If a commander, supervisor, shirt, or anyone else wants to keep old paperwork they are more than welcome to. If they are treating it like a true PIF then they should give it to you when you PCS but even then they don't have to do that because it is just their own personal file that they are keeping on you. It's pretty much their choice whether to give it to you when you PCS (like the old days) or throw it away.

In my opinion you need to find out what the true motivation for them keeping a 4 year old document is. It doesn't seem particularly relevant to anything other than an end of tour medal and most likely that isn't happening anyways if one of your EPRs was marked down because of an LOR.

imported_DannyJ
03-25-2014, 06:40 PM
Supervisors should always have the right to get rid of old paperwork, though bouncing the idea off the shirt isn't a bad idea...

BENDER56
03-25-2014, 06:41 PM
What SRG said.

Also, it's a little-know fact that the UCMJ expressly says that officers and NCOs who have knowledge of any wrongdoing have a legal obligation to report it to a responsible authority. Failure to do so can result in legal action. Senior Airmen and below do not have this obligation. (That's the little-known part.) So if you were an E-4 or below at the time they really had no grounds to give you the LOR.

That said, anyone with supervisory authority can pretty much give an LOR for anything he wants to. If the LOR is unwarranted, the person receiving it should show why that is so in his response. Both the LOR and the rebuttal should be filed together so anyone accessing the LOR can read both.

sandsjames
03-25-2014, 06:44 PM
Supervisors should always have the right to get rid of old paperwork, though bouncing the idea off the shirt isn't a bad idea...

Shirt at last base wouldn't allow supervisors to place anything in the PIF or remove anything. It ALL had to go through him, and he wasn't quick to remove stuff. Though, as has been said, PIFs mean nothing anyway, except to all squadron leadership to pass a grudge from one command section to the next.

weezy
03-25-2014, 06:45 PM
So if my supervisor wants to get rid of it, but the SQ CC and/or 1st Shirt doesn't, then there's really nothing we can do about it. We have asked why its still in their and we just get the, "SQ policy." answer.

sandsjames
03-25-2014, 06:50 PM
So if my supervisor wants to get rid of it, but the SQ CC and/or 1st Shirt doesn't, then there's really nothing we can do about it. We have asked why its still in their and we just get the, "SQ policy." answer.

Yep, nothing you can do about it. It's another micromanagement area that has popped up over the last few years, not allowing supervisors to actually have a role. But it can't, as far as I know, be used for anything derogatory towards you as it is an unofficial record.

imported_UncommonSense
03-25-2014, 06:56 PM
Yep, nothing you can do about it. It's another micromanagement area that has popped up over the last few years, not allowing supervisors to actually have a role. But it can't, as far as I know, be used for anything derogatory towards you as it is an unofficial record.

It's utilized at my location for many things. LOC in your PIF? That's a non-rec for a GCM. LOR in there when it's time for a PCS dec? That's a paddlin'.

SomeRandomGuy
03-25-2014, 07:21 PM
So if my supervisor wants to get rid of it, but the SQ CC and/or 1st Shirt doesn't, then there's really nothing we can do about it. We have asked why its still in their and we just get the, "SQ policy." answer.

You said this was almost 4 years ago correct? If you have re-enlisted since then you might want to try that angle. Legally speaking you cannot be punished for something that happened in your last enlistment if it was known when you re-enlisted. Basically, when your commander approves your re-enlistment he/she is saying that period of service was honorable. If you have re-enlisted since the incident I would try to work this angle. Point out that you do not think it is right that something from a previous enlistment is being used to characterize your current enlistment. It might actually gain some traction and you may find some regulations that help here. If you were to get a DUI tomorrow and your commander wanted to pursue separation this LOR couldn't be used as evidence (if in last enlistment). That would make me question what value there is in including it in your PIF.

weezy
03-25-2014, 07:33 PM
You said this was almost 4 years ago correct? If you have re-enlisted since then you might want to try that angle. Legally speaking you cannot be punished for something that happened in your last enlistment if it was known when you re-enlisted. Basically, when your commander approves your re-enlistment he/she is saying that period of service was honorable. If you have re-enlisted since the incident I would try to work this angle. Point out that you do not think it is right that something from a previous enlistment is being used to characterize your current enlistment. It might actually gain some traction and you may find some regulations that help here. If you were to get a DUI tomorrow and your commander wanted to pursue separation this LOR couldn't be used as evidence (if in last enlistment). That would make me question what value there is in including it in your PIF.

Haven't re-enlisted yet, but I do plan on re-enlisting and will definitely remember to possibly use this angle.


Yep, nothing you can do about it. It's another micromanagement area that has popped up over the last few years, not allowing supervisors to actually have a role. But it can't, as far as I know, be used for anything derogatory towards you as it is an unofficial record.

So if they were to use it in an official capacity would I be able to pursue action with ADC? I am not going to threaten my leadership of course, but just want to know what tools I can put in my back pocket.

sandsjames
03-25-2014, 08:02 PM
Haven't re-enlisted yet, but I do plan on re-enlisting and will definitely remember to possibly use this angle.



So if they were to use it in an official capacity would I be able to pursue action with ADC? I am not going to threaten my leadership of course, but just want to know what tools I can put in my back pocket.

I'm no expert, but I believe the ADC would definitely be the ones to talk to about that if something were to arise. I'm pretty sure that there's even something in the Records Management regs, but am so far unable to find it. Still looking though, because now I'm curious.

weezy
03-25-2014, 08:03 PM
I'm no expert, but I believe the ADC would definitely be the ones to talk to about that if something were to arise. I'm pretty sure that there's even something in the Records Management regs, but am so far unable to find it. Still looking though, because now I'm curious.

Thanks, but you definitely don't have to go through all of that.

sandsjames
03-25-2014, 08:11 PM
Thanks, but you definitely don't have to go through all of that.It's no problem. I've got spare time. And any chance for me to find a way to help the little guy stick it to The Man is worth the time.

imported_UncommonSense
03-25-2014, 08:13 PM
I'm no expert, but I believe the ADC would definitely be the ones to talk to about that if something were to arise. I'm pretty sure that there's even something in the Records Management regs, but am so far unable to find it. Still looking though, because now I'm curious.

TABLE & RULE: T 36 - 12 R 02.00

TITLE: Personnel Information File (PIF)

AUTHORITY: N1-AFU-90-03

CURRENT: YES
DATE CREATED: Unknown

DATE MODIFIED: 08/Jun/2005

DATE APPROVED:

FROZEN RECORD: NO
COLUMN B CONSISTING OF:
extra copies of records covered elsewhere in this regulation or other records necessary to manage the member at the unit/supervisor level

COLUMN C WHICH ARE:
kept by the commanders and supervisors in the Command/Supervisor Assigned Personnel Information File

COLUMN D DISPOSITION:
Retain in office file until superseded, no longer needed, separation, or reassignment of individual on PCA or PCS.

sandsjames
03-25-2014, 08:15 PM
TABLE & RULE: T 36 - 12 R 02.00

TITLE: Personnel Information File (PIF)

AUTHORITY: N1-AFU-90-03

CURRENT: YES
DATE CREATED: Unknown

DATE MODIFIED: 08/Jun/2005

DATE APPROVED:

FROZEN RECORD: NO
COLUMN B CONSISTING OF:
extra copies of records covered elsewhere in this regulation or other records necessary to manage the member at the unit/supervisor level

COLUMN C WHICH ARE:
kept by the commanders and supervisors in the Command/Supervisor Assigned Personnel Information File

COLUMN D DISPOSITION:
Retain in office file until superseded, no longer needed, separation, or reassignment of individual on PCA or PCS.Interesting. Thanks. Still curious if they can be used for any actions after a certain amount of time.

Chief_KO
03-25-2014, 08:36 PM
Column D: "no longer needed": Once the performance report is closed out, any paperwork (positive or negative) that occurred during that period is "no longer needed".
Column C: kept by commanders and supervisors...NOT the First Sergeant. Although the 8F typically has the files in his office, they are maintained by the CC & supv.

As a Chief, I would clance at the PIF when EPR/Dec/special duty application, reenlistment, etc. came across my desk. I NEVER recall ever seeing any paperwork (other than assignment RIP, etc.) older than a year in any folder.

Interesting unit...especially for something 4 years old, that would mean approximately 2 CCs, 2 CCMs, & 2 CCFs are choosing to not do the right thing....

weezy
03-25-2014, 08:51 PM
Column D: "no longer needed": Once the performance report is closed out, any paperwork (positive or negative) that occurred during that period is "no longer needed".
Column C: kept by commanders and supervisors...NOT the First Sergeant. Although the 8F typically has the files in his office, they are maintained by the CC & supv.

As a Chief, I would clance at the PIF when EPR/Dec/special duty application, reenlistment, etc. came across my desk. I NEVER recall ever seeing any paperwork (other than assignment RIP, etc.) older than a year in any folder.

Interesting unit...especially for something 4 years old, that would mean approximately 2 CCs, 2 CCMs, & 2 CCFs are choosing to not do the right thing....

Only in Minot...

BENDER56
03-25-2014, 09:03 PM
So if they were to use it in an official capacity would I be able to pursue action with ADC? I am not going to threaten my leadership of course, but just want to know what tools I can put in my back pocket.

The ADC doesn't "pursue actions" for members. They're there to ensure members' rights are protected and they are a check and balance to prevent commanders/1st Sgts/supervisors from "free lancing." If you haven't already, you should make an appointment to go and talk to them about this. As I said in an earlier comment, your leadership might not have even had a "legal" reason to have given you that LOR in the first place.

weezy
03-25-2014, 09:07 PM
The ADC doesn't "pursue actions" for members. They're there to ensure members' rights are protected and they are a check and balance to prevent commanders/1st Sgts/supervisors from "free lancing." If you haven't already, you should make an appointment to go and talk to them about this. As I said in an earlier comment, your leadership might not have even had a "legal" reason to have given you that LOR in the first place.

I am currently TDY so I had my supervisor go in there and look at the response. ADC put in the response that the only thing I should have recieved is a verbal counseling.

BENDER56
03-25-2014, 11:30 PM
ADC put in the response that the only thing I should have recieved is a verbal counseling.

That's good. Keep in mind -- anyone who reads the LOR will also see the response. Still, if its presence in your "PIF" can have a detrimental effect on you (e.g., denial of special duty assignments) you should keep angling for its removal.

Of course, this advice is coming from a guy who, when I was a 1st Sgt, didn't allow anything removed from a PIF unless it was proven to be wrong to begin with.

sandsjames
03-25-2014, 11:41 PM
That's good. Keep in mind -- anyone who reads the LOR will also see the response. Still, if its presence in your "PIF" can have a detrimental effect on you (e.g., denial of special duty assignments) you should keep angling for its removal.

Of course, this advice is coming from a guy who, when I was a 1st Sgt, didn't allow anything removed from a PIF unless it was proven to be wrong to begin with.

Really??? Why's that??? To what ends?

BENDER56
03-26-2014, 12:57 AM
Really??? Why's that??? To what ends?

Well, to begin with, PIFs used to be well controlled. In a properly functioning orderly room (with which I was usually blessed) the only people who could check out a troops' PIF were the CC, me (the 1st Sgt), and the rater. We already knew what was in there anyway, so what's the harm in letting it stay there. More important was if the troop got the message and changed his ways and walked the straight and narrow.

The AF has always been a what-have-you-done-for-me-lately organization -- regarding both good things and bad. That's how the fair-haired golden boy of the squadron can become persona non grata with one major slip-up and how the squadron goof-up can become Airman of the Month if he straightens up and flies right.

So, the contents of the PIF didn't hurt a guy who had a slip-up but then changed for the better, but the contents were useful for the guy who stayed out of trouble for a while but then regressed. Then, if needed, we had a history we could use for more severe disciplinary action. A paper trail, if you will.

wxjumper
03-26-2014, 05:37 AM
So I have had an LOR in my PIF for four years come this June. This LOR has gone through two CC's and I can't count how many 1st Sergeants. Every year my supervisor asks to have it removed and my leadership says they won't. I have looked at every records AFI there is and I have found nothing on PIF paperwork removal. Is there ANY route (chain of command/legal) I can take to try and have this LOR removed or do I have to wait until hell freezes over?

I know everybody is going to ask so... I got the LOR because a couple of co-workers were doing spice and I didn't report them. I got it. I fucked up and should have done something. Can I move on now.

Another little note. I applied for AF Honor Guard two and a half years ago and my then CC denied my package because of this LOR and I'm looking at applying again, but I'm not going to go through the whole package making process if my CC is just going to deny it again.
It is Commander's prerogative. If they want to keep it in there, then there is nothing you (or legal) can do about it. If you want it gone and your unit will not remove it, then your only option is to PCS.

sandsjames
03-26-2014, 10:02 AM
Well, to begin with, PIFs used to be well controlled. In a properly functioning orderly room (with which I was usually blessed) the only people who could check out a troops' PIF were the CC, me (the 1st Sgt), and the rater. We already knew what was in there anyway, so what's the harm in letting it stay there. More important was if the troop got the message and changed his ways and walked the straight and narrow.

The AF has always been a what-have-you-done-for-me-lately organization -- regarding both good things and bad. That's how the fair-haired golden boy of the squadron can become persona non grata with one major slip-up and how the squadron goof-up can become Airman of the Month if he straightens up and flies right.

So, the contents of the PIF didn't hurt a guy who had a slip-up but then changed for the better, but the contents were useful for the guy who stayed out of trouble for a while but then regressed. Then, if needed, we had a history we could use for more severe disciplinary action. A paper trail, if you will.

This is exactly why supervisors, so many times, choose to avoid doing paperwork, even if it's warranted. If I, as a supervisor, do paperwork on my troop, I feel it's entirely up to me as to how long that paperwork stays on file. If I feel that the 1st Sgt, or Commander, is going to be reluctant to remove it, then I'm going to be reluctant to file it. It's exactly where the practice of "top drawer-ing" came from.

If the paperwork is written by the Shirt or Commander then I have no issue with them being the one to determine when it is removed. But if the supervisor writes it, then it should be on the supervisor to decide when it goes away.

wxjumper
03-26-2014, 10:59 AM
This is exactly why supervisors, so many times, choose to avoid doing paperwork, even if it's warranted. If I, as a supervisor, do paperwork on my troop, I feel it's entirely up to me as to how long that paperwork stays on file. If I feel that the 1st Sgt, or Commander, is going to be reluctant to remove it, then I'm going to be reluctant to file it. It's exactly where the practice of "top drawer-ing" came from.

If the paperwork is written by the Shirt or Commander then I have no issue with them being the one to determine when it is removed. But if the supervisor writes it, then it should be on the supervisor to decide when it goes away.

You make a great point and this is what I do too in most situations (top drawing paperwork). If the troop becomes a problem child, well then you have the paperwork trail you need to escalate the situation and then you start filling it into the Squadron PIF. If it was a one time mistake, and the troop is an otherwise a solid performer, then the paperwork stays with you and when it comes time for the Squadron to rack and stack for schools, Below the zone, or other things, the Commander can't use that one time mistake to make the decision easier for him/her.

However, this looks like it wouldn't work in the OP's case as the reason he had an LOR was a drug case that had the Commander's visibility, meaning his LOR probably came directly from the Commander. Nothing his supervisor could do to try to protect him in this case.

weezy
03-26-2014, 03:35 PM
However, this looks like it wouldn't work in the OP's case as the reason he had an LOR was a drug case that had the Commander's visibility, meaning his LOR probably came directly from the Commander. Nothing his supervisor could do to try to protect him in this case.

The LOR was commander directed, but was written by my then flight chief who retired a few years ago.

BRUWIN
03-26-2014, 05:34 PM
Haven't re-enlisted yet, but I do plan on re-enlisting and will definitely remember to possibly use this angle.



So if they were to use it in an official capacity would I be able to pursue action with ADC? I am not going to threaten my leadership of course, but just want to know what tools I can put in my back pocket.

Many many years ago (1980s)...i saw a MSgt ensure a SrA was reenlisted while he was under investigation for cocaine use. It is kind of a long story but the SrA had already implicated a 1st Lt he was dating and she was court martialed. They had yet to figure out what to do with him until the court martial was complete. Anyways...the MSgt pushed the CC to reenlist the guy and since the CC had no clue of the reenlistment rule he let him reenlist thinking that depending on the course of the investigation he could kick him out afterwards if the cocaine thing was substanciated. The MSgt was well aware of the rule...he was looking out for his troop. Later on the SrA's cociane use was substanciated but they couldn't bust him. This was back in the day when MSgt's had a lot of input.....and brass balls.

SomeRandomGuy
03-26-2014, 05:40 PM
Many many years ago (1980s)...i saw a MSgt ensure a SrA was reenlisted while he was under investigation for cocaine use. It is kind of a long story but the SrA had already implicated a 1st Lt he was dating and she was court martialed. They had yet to figure out what to do with him until the court martial was complete. Anyways...the MSgt pushed the CC to reenlist the guy and since the CC had no clue of the reenlistment rule he let him reenlist thinking that depending on the course of the investigation he could kick him out afterwards if the cocaine thing was substanciated. The MSgt was well aware of the rule...he was looking out for his troop. Later on the SrA's cociane use was substanciated but they couldn't bust him. This was back in the day when MSgt's had a lot of input.....and brass balls.

OSI and the legal community have learned their lesson on this one. People who are under investigation can't reenlist or even retire. They get extended one month at a time. It gets very annoying from a finance perspective. At one base I pretty much knew every person under investigation because their pay would get stopped every single month when MPF didn't get their extension pushed through. Some investigations can be quite long too. I always kind of wondered why some of theese people didn't just say, "my extension ended, I got paid $0, looks like I'm free to go"

Stalwart
03-26-2014, 06:08 PM
The MSgt was well aware of the rule...he was looking out for his troop.

I would not call ensuring that a service member is not held accountable (or at least letting the process determine if he/she should be held accountable) "looking out for them" ... it is more like hooking them up.

BRUWIN
03-26-2014, 07:16 PM
I would not call ensuring that a service member is not held accountable (or at least letting the process determine if he/she should be held accountable) "looking out for them" ... it is more like hooking them up.

That's what the MSgt called it. But I would agree with your assessment. I remember being kind of pissed about it because although I got along great with the SrA in question I never would have gotten a break like that. He was a golden boy before all this went down. And the Lt he was dating got jail time for a variety of charges besides cocaine....Academy grad. The whole thing was a big deal and was in the base newspaper and all that. I wasn't on board with my buddy being a tattle tale and getting rewarded for it either. That part really stuck with me. He did get out after his second enlistment. He was a marked man and he knew it.

BENDER56
03-26-2014, 09:45 PM
This is exactly why supervisors, so many times, choose to avoid doing paperwork, even if it's warranted. If I, as a supervisor, do paperwork on my troop, I feel it's entirely up to me as to how long that paperwork stays on file. If I feel that the 1st Sgt, or Commander, is going to be reluctant to remove it, then I'm going to be reluctant to file it. It's exactly where the practice of "top drawer-ing" came from.

If the paperwork is written by the Shirt or Commander then I have no issue with them being the one to determine when it is removed. But if the supervisor writes it, then it should be on the supervisor to decide when it goes away.

The thing you're missing is that the paperwork in the PIF doesn't harm the airman any more than "top-drawer" paperwork does. If the airman turns things around it's all good. If he doesn't, then the paperwork matters and it doesn't make any difference if it's in the PIF or the "top drawer."

The one difference is, if an airman does turn out to be a repeat troublemaker it can delay the use of bigger hammers if the troop had multiple LOCs/LORs but the supervisor tossed them each time the airman showed improvement -- instead of having all of them in the PIF whereby the commander can justify going to the level of NJP.

Tell me; what exactly is accomplished by destroying old LOCs/LORs?

sandsjames
03-27-2014, 12:04 AM
The thing you're missing is that the paperwork in the PIF doesn't harm the airman any more than "top-drawer" paperwork does. If the airman turns things around it's all good. If he doesn't, then the paperwork matters and it doesn't make any difference if it's in the PIF or the "top drawer."

The one difference is, if an airman does turn out to be a repeat troublemaker it can delay the use of bigger hammers if the troop had multiple LOCs/LORs but the supervisor tossed them each time the airman showed improvement -- instead of having all of them in the PIF whereby the commander can justify going to the level of NJP.

Tell me; what exactly is accomplished by destroying old LOCs/LORs?

It can harm the airman much more than the "top-drawer". Look at the situation of the OP. 4 years...that's at least 2 commanders, 2 shirts, etc. So if they review the PIF, they see something that is outdated (especially if nothing else has occurred) and can easily form an initial impression of the troop based on that LOC/LOR. Even if the guy has completely turned things around, first impressions are hard to change.

The top-drawer is for the supervisor's eyes only, and used as a corrective measure. The same supervisor who sees the everyday actions of the troop. When he sees a turn around, he generally trashes the paperwork.

As far as the NJP, there HAS to be a time limit. Remember, it's a corrective tool, not a punishment tool. 6 months, a year, sure, that's fine. But 4 years!!??? What purpose can that possibly serve? Doing that is for no other purpose than to be a vindictive command section, looking for a reason to get rid of someone.

I can see something being kept for 4 years if there have been other issues, in between, that end in paperwork. We had a guy that got speeding tickets about every 6 months. All those were in his PIF. That was a trend. Making a mistake every 4 years is not a trend.

And if I, as a supervisor, place something in the PIF, it should be up to me when it comes out. If the Command Section doesn't trust my judgment on when it's no longer needed then they shouldn't have me in a supervisory position.

It's about nothing more than a Shirt or Commander wanting total control...total micromanagement...of all issues. And, in this situation, I'd never...ever...place something in the PIF unless I had already determined, as a supervisor, that I needed a paper trail.

To answer your question about what is accomplished by destroying them? How about showing the troop that you realize this was a one time mistake? How about showing the troop that you trust them? How about showing the troop that you aren't looking for an opportunity to show them the door?

Ripcord
03-27-2014, 12:46 AM
But 4 years!!??? What purpose can that possibly serve? Doing that is for no other purpose than to be a vindictive command section, looking for a reason to get rid of someone.

I can see something being kept for 4 years if there have been other issues, in between, that end in paperwork. We had a guy that got speeding tickets about every 6 months. All those were in his PIF. That was a trend. Making a mistake every 4 years is not a trend.


PCS and mid tour medals come to mind. How can you write a person a medal for "meritorious service" if their entire tenure was not meritorious?

Here's my opinion as a former supervisor and now a First Sergeant.

Desk drawer paperwork is pointless and not worth a supervisors time. If it's not in a PIF or UIF it didn't happen.

PIFs are for internal tracking and IMO need to include good stuff (i.e. awards LOAs, etc.) not just the bad. UIFs are there if you need something to stick and follow them for up to 2 years (art 15).

I'll be I honest did not realize how important this was until I became a shirt. Sometimes people just need to go. It's allot harder to get rid of someone without a paperwork trail especially if they are board eligible. You have to be able to show that progressive discipline was implemented for recurring problems and the member was given a chance to correct but did not. In my experience the same people complaining about not wanting to hurt an Airmen's career by doing paperwork are the same ones that come to me crying about why I can't get rid of a dirtbag based simply on their word/opinion. My response is the same. If its not documented in black and white it didn't happen. It's allot easier to do the work up front and hope they correct the behavior (which is the purpose of paperwork anyway) then it is to start that paperwork trail once amn douchebag passes the threshold.

To the extent that paperwork hurts someones career... Only if they let it by not correcting or getting worse. If there are no consequences for bad behavior then why have a standard?

weezy
03-27-2014, 02:07 AM
All of this talk about "top-drawer" and paper trails is not relevant because that LOR is the only piece of paperwork I have ever received. So it is a single piece of paperwork that has been in my PIF for four years.

Gonzo432
03-27-2014, 02:52 AM
All of this talk about "top-drawer" and paper trails is not relevant because that LOR is the only piece of paperwork I have ever received. So it is a single piece of paperwork that has been in my PIF for four years.

Then why are we talking about it?

weezy
03-27-2014, 02:55 AM
Then why are we talking about it?

We? I don't think you've posted in this thread before that post.

Gonzo432
03-27-2014, 03:03 AM
We? I don't think you've posted in this thread before that post.

Would you have answered the question if I'd have asked, "Then why are ya'll talking about it?"

weezy
03-27-2014, 03:04 AM
Would you have answered the question if I'd have asked, "Then why are ya'll talking about it?"

Meh, probably not.

sandsjames
03-27-2014, 10:22 AM
PCS and mid tour medals come to mind. How can you write a person a medal for "meritorious service" if their entire tenure was not meritorious?

Here's my opinion as a former supervisor and now a First Sergeant.

Desk drawer paperwork is pointless and not worth a supervisors time. If it's not in a PIF or UIF it didn't happen.

PIFs are for internal tracking and IMO need to include good stuff (i.e. awards LOAs, etc.) not just the bad. UIFs are there if you need something to stick and follow them for up to 2 years (art 15).

I'll be I honest did not realize how important this was until I became a shirt. Sometimes people just need to go. It's allot harder to get rid of someone without a paperwork trail especially if they are board eligible. You have to be able to show that progressive discipline was implemented for recurring problems and the member was given a chance to correct but did not. In my experience the same people complaining about not wanting to hurt an Airmen's career by doing paperwork are the same ones that come to me crying about why I can't get rid of a dirtbag based simply on their word/opinion. My response is the same. If its not documented in black and white it didn't happen. It's allot easier to do the work up front and hope they correct the behavior (which is the purpose of paperwork anyway) then it is to start that paperwork trail once amn douchebag passes the threshold.

To the extent that paperwork hurts someones career... Only if they let it by not correcting or getting worse. If there are no consequences for bad behavior then why have a standard?


Thank you for the point about the UIF..."up to 2 years". So why would an LOR be kept for up to 4, in the case of the OP, when the entire UIF is only good for 2?

As far as the medal, I guess if you feel 1 piece of paperwork merits no medal then the perception that all you need to do to get one is keep your nose clean is absolutely true. Don't worry about what they actually did on their tour. Did they get in trouble at all? Yup...denied!

BOSS302
03-27-2014, 11:17 AM
Thank you for the point about the UIF..."up to 2 years". So why would an LOR be kept for up to 4, in the case of the OP, when the entire UIF is only good for 2?

As far as the medal, I guess if you feel 1 piece of paperwork merits no medal then the perception that all you need to do to get one is keep your nose clean is absolutely true. Don't worry about what they actually did on their tour. Did they get in trouble at all? Yup...denied!

Power Pro never got any medals due to their reputation for rapage and assault.

sandsjames
03-27-2014, 11:49 AM
Power Pro never got any medals due to their reputation for rapage and assault.

The reputation alone should merit and Achievement.

BOSS302
03-27-2014, 01:22 PM
The reputation alone should merit and Achievement.

I recall an entire Civil Engineer squadron being shutdown due to every section having been violated by Power Pro. It took 200 grief counselors, 50 medics, and 1K gallons of bleach to repair that squadron & the people in it.

Ripcord
03-27-2014, 04:31 PM
Thank you for the point about the UIF..."up to 2 years". So why would an LOR be kept for up to 4, in the case of the OP, when the entire UIF is only good for 2?

As far as the medal, I guess if you feel 1 piece of paperwork merits no medal then the perception that all you need to do to get one is keep your nose clean is absolutely true. Don't worry about what they actually did on their tour. Did they get in trouble at all? Yup...denied!

A UIF entry is pretty much garaunteed to to effect what is written in ones EPR thereby cautifying it forever be it a marked down on the front and/or back. If you had a UIF you are pretty much gauranteed not to get a medal. Contents of a PIF (during the rating period) may or may not be included depending on what it was, recurrance, frequency etc. Same goes for medals. Just because someone gets an LOC or LOR doesn't necessarily mean they don't get a medal. That depends on what the LOC/LOR was actually for as well as their level of performance/conduct before and after the fact and CC's stance/decision.

sandsjames
03-27-2014, 04:48 PM
A UIF entry is pretty much garaunteed to to effect what is written in ones EPR thereby cautifying it forever be it a marked down on the front and/or back. If you had a UIF you are pretty much gauranteed not to get a medal. Contents of a PIF (during the rating period) may or may not be included depending on what it was, recurrance, frequency etc. Same goes for medals. Just because someone gets an LOC or LOR doesn't necessarily mean they don't get a medal. That depends on what the LOC/LOR was actually for as well as their level of performance/conduct before and after the fact and CC's stance/decision.

I appreciate the history lesson. Still don't think paperwork written by a supervisor shouldn't be able to be removed by the supervisor. Also don't think that a single piece of paperwork should be kept for four years.

SomeRandomGuy
03-27-2014, 05:27 PM
I appreciate the history lesson. Still don't think paperwork written by a supervisor shouldn't be able to be removed by the supervisor. Also don't think that a single piece of paperwork should be kept for four years.

I agree with you. Compare these situations. Amn 1 and 2 go to tech school together. Amn 1 gets orders to Korea for a year while Amn 2 gets orders to Minot. Amn 1 violates curfew 3 times in Korea and has an LOR in his PIF until he leaves at the end of his year. Amn 2 knows about his friends violating a lawful order (smoking spice) and doesn't tell anyone. Amn 2 also gets an LOR. After Korea, Amn 1 gets orders to Minot. Him and Amn 2 are the two best Amn in the squadron. When it comes time for BTZ packages Amn 1 beats Amn 2 because Amn 2 has an LOR in his PIF while Amn 1 removed his after leaving Korea. Both Amn 1 and 2 get orders to leave Minot around the same time. Again Amn 1 gets a medal while Amn 2 is denied based on his LOR. Both incidents happened at the same time. Because Amn 2 couldn't get out from underneath the LOR his career looks very different than Amn 1. That just doesn't seem fair to me.

BENDER56
03-27-2014, 06:16 PM
Thank you for the point about the UIF..."up to 2 years". So why would an LOR be kept for up to 4, in the case of the OP, when the entire UIF is only good for 2?

As far as the medal, I guess if you feel 1 piece of paperwork merits no medal then the perception that all you need to do to get one is keep your nose clean is absolutely true. Don't worry about what they actually did on their tour. Did they get in trouble at all? Yup...denied!

The usefulness of a UIF is that it can follow a troop to his new unit, unlike documents in a PIF which are either destroyed or given to the troop upon PCS. In my experience, many UIFs were created on troops for that very reason. For enlisted troops, a commander can remove the UIF early. It's a potent rehabilitation tool.

I'll only partly concede the point about a single LOC/LOR being used to deny an end-of-tour dec, but I believe the hard-liners who do that are in a very small minority. In my 12 years and nine units as a 1st Sgt in I can recall many decorations being given to deserving troops who had some minor paperwork in their PIFs. I know there are some incompetent, clueless commanders out there because I worked for one, but the other 17 were hardly the unreasonable hard-asses some would make them out to be.

sandsjames
03-27-2014, 06:19 PM
I agree with you. Compare these situations. Amn 1 and 2 go to tech school together. Amn 1 gets orders to Korea for a year while Amn 2 gets orders to Minot. Amn 1 violates curfew 3 times in Korea and has an LOR in his PIF until he leaves at the end of his year. Amn 2 knows about his friends violating a lawful order (smoking spice) and doesn't tell anyone. Amn 2 also gets an LOR. After Korea, Amn 1 gets orders to Minot. Him and Amn 2 are the two best Amn in the squadron. When it comes time for BTZ packages Amn 1 beats Amn 2 because Amn 2 has an LOR in his PIF while Amn 1 removed his after leaving Korea. Both Amn 1 and 2 get orders to leave Minot around the same time. Again Amn 1 gets a medal while Amn 2 is denied based on his LOR. Both incidents happened at the same time. Because Amn 2 couldn't get out from underneath the LOR his career looks very different than Amn 1. That just doesn't seem fair to me.


Great example!

sandsjames
03-27-2014, 06:22 PM
The usefulness of a UIF is that it can follow a troop to his new unit, unlike documents in a PIF which are either destroyed or given to the troop upon PCS. In my experience, many UIFs were created on troops for that very reason. For enlisted troops, a commander can remove the UIF early. It's a potent rehabilitation tool.

I'll only partly concede the point about a single LOC/LOR being used to deny an end-of-tour dec, but I believe the hard-liners who do that are in a very small minority. In my 12 years and nine units as a 1st Sgt in I can recall many decorations being given to deserving troops who had some minor paperwork in their PIFs. I know there are some incompetent, clueless commanders out there because I worked for one, but the other 17 were hardly the unreasonable hard-asses some would make them out to be.

Sounds reasonable. I still don't understand why the Shirt (in general) won't let the supervisor who wrote the paperwork, and place it in the PIF, determine when it's time for it to come out. Do you not see how that sways many supervisors from doing proper paperwork when it's warranted?

BENDER56
03-27-2014, 06:31 PM
It can harm the airman much more than the "top-drawer". Look at the situation of the OP. 4 years...that's at least 2 commanders, 2 shirts, etc. So if they review the PIF, they see something that is outdated (especially if nothing else has occurred) and can easily form an initial impression of the troop based on that LOC/LOR. Even if the guy has completely turned things around, first impressions are hard to change.

The top-drawer is for the supervisor's eyes only, and used as a corrective measure. The same supervisor who sees the everyday actions of the troop. When he sees a turn around, he generally trashes the paperwork.

As far as the NJP, there HAS to be a time limit. Remember, it's a corrective tool, not a punishment tool. 6 months, a year, sure, that's fine. But 4 years!!??? What purpose can that possibly serve? Doing that is for no other purpose than to be a vindictive command section, looking for a reason to get rid of someone.

I can see something being kept for 4 years if there have been other issues, in between, that end in paperwork. We had a guy that got speeding tickets about every 6 months. All those were in his PIF. That was a trend. Making a mistake every 4 years is not a trend.

And if I, as a supervisor, place something in the PIF, it should be up to me when it comes out. If the Command Section doesn't trust my judgment on when it's no longer needed then they shouldn't have me in a supervisory position.

It's about nothing more than a Shirt or Commander wanting total control...total micromanagement...of all issues. And, in this situation, I'd never...ever...place something in the PIF unless I had already determined, as a supervisor, that I needed a paper trail.

To answer your question about what is accomplished by destroying them? How about showing the troop that you realize this was a one time mistake? How about showing the troop that you trust them? How about showing the troop that you aren't looking for an opportunity to show them the door?

I've just noticed that a big part of your dislike for keeping things in a PIF forever is your belief that those looking at the PIF, "...can easily form an initial impression of the troop based on that LOC/LOR. Even if the guy has completely turned things around, first impressions are hard to change."

I'm here to tell you that simply isn't so. I honestly don't think any commander I ever worked for routinely reviewed the PIFs of his enlisted troops. That's what he has a 1st Sgt for. And as far as 1st Sgts go, I knew dozens of them during my time as a shirt and I can't recall a single one of them disagreeing with the belief that the only thing that mattered is what an airman is doing now. Past performance good or bad was just that -- past performance. It was only when a troop started a negative trend that we even got involved. Because that's what we have supervisors for. And outside of commanders, shirts and supervisors, nobody else is looking in the PIF.

Again, something in a PIF doesn't "hurt" a troop any more than something in your "top-drawer."

sandsjames
03-27-2014, 06:50 PM
I've just noticed that a big part of your dislike for keeping things in a PIF forever is your belief that those looking at the PIF, "...can easily form an initial impression of the troop based on that LOC/LOR. Even if the guy has completely turned things around, first impressions are hard to change."

I'm here to tell you that simply isn't so. I honestly don't think any commander I ever worked for routinely reviewed the PIFs of his enlisted troops. That's what he has a 1st Sgt for. And as far as 1st Sgts go, I knew dozens of them during my time as a shirt and I can't recall a single one of them disagreeing with the belief that the only thing that mattered is what an airman is doing now. Past performance good or bad was just that -- past performance. It was only when a troop started a negative trend that we even got involved. Because that's what we have supervisors for. And outside of commanders, shirts and supervisors, nobody else is looking in the PIF.

Again, something in a PIF doesn't "hurt" a troop any more than something in your "top-drawer."

Guess you don't want to answer the previous question about why it's not up to the supervisor to remove paperwork he placed in the PIF...I can see why. Tough to answer a question that doesn't have a valid answer.

And it CAN hurt. Look at the example above of the two troops going for BTZ. Because one has PCSd he has a clean slate...while the other has lingering paperwork.

weezy
03-27-2014, 06:54 PM
I've just noticed that a big part of your dislike for keeping things in a PIF forever is your belief that those looking at the PIF, "...can easily form an initial impression of the troop based on that LOC/LOR. Even if the guy has completely turned things around, first impressions are hard to change."

I'm here to tell you that simply isn't so. I honestly don't think any commander I ever worked for routinely reviewed the PIFs of his enlisted troops. That's what he has a 1st Sgt for. And as far as 1st Sgts go, I knew dozens of them during my time as a shirt and I can't recall a single one of them disagreeing with the belief that the only thing that mattered is what an airman is doing now. Past performance good or bad was just that -- past performance. It was only when a troop started a negative trend that we even got involved. Because that's what we have supervisors for. And outside of commanders, shirts and supervisors, nobody else is looking in the PIF.

Again, something in a PIF doesn't "hurt" a troop any more than something in your "top-drawer."

This only applies if your leadership doesn't look at past performance and in this case my leadership does.

BENDER56
03-27-2014, 07:31 PM
Sounds reasonable. I still don't understand why the Shirt (in general) won't let the supervisor who wrote the paperwork, and place it in the PIF, determine when it's time for it to come out. Do you not see how that sways many supervisors from doing proper paperwork when it's warranted?

If it does, it shouldn't. Part of that, I think, is a lack of understanding on the part of supervisors regarding what happens at the shirt/superintendent/commander level. We aren't up there looking to drop hammers on people. We just want to ensure policies are followed and equally enforced throughout the squadron. If some troop gets paperwork and it goes in the PIF, we file it and forget about it -- unless more and more paperwork keeps going into the same PIF.

I had been in 14 years when I became a shirt and had been a supervisor for seven (five years as an instructor delayed the onset of that) but I was completely unprepared for the sheer volume and variety of disciplinary stuff that rises to the shirt/commander level. But just because it came to me didn't mean I had to take ownership of it and "micromanage" it. Much of my job was providing advice to supervisors on how to turn around their trouble troops. Let's face it, there are a lot of supervisors in a squadron and only one of me. Besides, that's what they get paid for. The last thing I wanted to be was the shirt who handles everything.

Now, I don't think I've mentioned it in all these previous comments, but I'm not totally against "top-drawer" paperwork. The supervisor has the first shot at correcting his troops' behavior and if that's a tool that works, fine. But if something's in the PIF, it's usually for more than reporting to work late a few times. And, I'll say it again, it isn't hurting anyone by being there. (Although, I'll admit SRG's example of the Korea/Minot airmen gives me some pause. But I wonder if that's a common or a rare occurrence.) And I suppose I should add here; I think I wrote earlier that I never removed anything from a PIF when I was a 1st Sgt. That was a bit of hyperbole. I did, rarely, agree to remove some things but as a general rule I didn't.

On a slightly related note, sometimes -- due to more experience with these types of matters -- a 1st Sgt knows at what level an infraction needs to be handled more than a supervisor does. I once had a troop in one of my squadrons go south and I asked the supervisor for any paperwork he had. They were all MFRs, unsigned by the troop and therefore useless in any punitive actions. But nestled among the documents was an MFR stating that the troop was witnessed snorting lines of something at an off-base party. The supervisor's reason for not upchanneling this info was that he didn't trust the source and he verbally counseled the troop and wrote the (unsigned, of course) MFR. Now, that was something that needed to be brought to OSI's attention when it happened. But even though it was nearly-year-old info, we were still legally bound to investigate the allegation. So we tracked down the source -- who had PCSed to another continent -- and of course his memory of the events had degraded. He was certain, however, that other airmen were at that party, too. The investigation went on for about two months but no valid evidence could be gleaned so it was dropped. My lesson learned was to educate supervisors on the difference between minor infractions and those that need to be looked into by the commander, SF, or OSI.

BENDER56
03-27-2014, 08:00 PM
Guess you don't want to answer the previous question about why it's not up to the supervisor to remove paperwork he placed in the PIF...I can see why. Tough to answer a question that doesn't have a valid answer.

I don't usually have conversations here -- I usually just comment and move on. Right now, comments are appearing faster than I can craft thoughtful responses. Perhaps I answered this in the third paragraph of my last comment?


And it CAN hurt. Look at the example above of the two troops going for BTZ. Because one has PCSd he has a clean slate...while the other has lingering paperwork.

I'll have to concede that's a valid concern.

In my last reply to the OP, I wrote that as an overarching policy I prefer a policy of keeping things in the PIF vice a policy where things are routinely removed. Perhaps I'm thinking of this as a false dichotomy. I can see where a case-by-case policy is the way to go, but based on having a lot of experience with this, I think that an early removal policy would result in more "Aw crap!" moments than a policy that leans towards keeping most things in there.

BENDER56
03-27-2014, 08:06 PM
This only applies if your leadership doesn't look at past performance and in this case my leadership does.

Yeah, I know there are a few less-than-stellar people in the AF.

I guess I'm looking at the difference between having an overarching policy whereby derogatory info is removed routinely from PIFs vice a policy in which little, if any, paperwork is removed. My conclusion is that, overall, the latter policy is better.

But as your case seems to indicate, there are exceptions.

Again, if you were an E-4 or below when you received that LOR, there was no legal justification for them to give it to you to begin with.

LogDog
03-27-2014, 08:31 PM
Regarding the PIF, the information in it needs to be reviewed on an individual basis. You have to look at why the PIF was created. If it was because of infractions were minor in nature then that information could be removed after sufficient time has lapsed showing the individual changed their behavior or the action(s) haven't been repeated. This is a good tool to reinforce the positive changes the individual made.

For actions that were more serious, again, you have to look at the action(s) and the individual. Serious infractions shouldn't routinely or be easily removed from the PIF. What a supervisor, First Sergeant, or commander can do is to review the PIF and make a determination as to the relevancy of the information and the behavior of the individual today. It's possible the information in the PIF is serious enough to be retained in order to prevent the individual from re-enlists, PSCing, taking a special duty assignment, or separation from the service. These types of situations will most likely involve legal matters and therefore require the PIF information to be retained longer.

sandsjames
03-27-2014, 09:28 PM
Yeah, I know there are a few less-than-stellar people in the AF.

I guess I'm looking at the difference between having an overarching policy whereby derogatory info is removed routinely from PIFs vice a policy in which little, if any, paperwork is removed. My conclusion is that, overall, the latter policy is better.

But as your case seems to indicate, there are exceptions.

Again, if you were an E-4 or below when you received that LOR, there was no legal justification for them to give it to you to begin with.

Either way...whatever the reason...4 years is WAAAAAY beyond the common sense amount of time.

sandsjames
03-27-2014, 09:30 PM
Regarding the PIF, the information in it needs to be reviewed on an individual basis. You have to look at why the PIF was created. If it was because of infractions were minor in nature then that information could be removed after sufficient time has lapsed showing the individual changed their behavior or the action(s) haven't been repeated. This is a good tool to reinforce the positive changes the individual made.

For actions that were more serious, again, you have to look at the action(s) and the individual. Serious infractions shouldn't routinely or be easily removed from the PIF. What a supervisor, First Sergeant, or commander can do is to review the PIF and make a determination as to the relevancy of the information and the behavior of the individual today. It's possible the information in the PIF is serious enough to be retained in order to prevent the individual from re-enlists, PSCing, taking a special duty assignment, or separation from the service. These types of situations will most likely involve legal matters and therefore require the PIF information to be retained longer.

No...this sort of problem would require a UIF, which can only be kept for 2 years. If an entire file dedicated to unfavorable information is good for only 2 years, then what can possibly be the justification for keeping a single file in a simple PIF for longer than that? It's asinine.

weezy
03-27-2014, 10:00 PM
My supervisor asked to have it removed again today and she was told by the shirt that he doesn't remove anything from the PIF. When she asked what the reasoning was; she got told it was to protect the CC. So if somebodys paperwork was removed and that person ends up going to court for whatever reason, then leadserhip can't use that paperwork that was pulled out.

Ripcord
03-27-2014, 10:00 PM
I had been in 14 years when I became a shirt and had been a supervisor for seven (five years as an instructor delayed the onset of that) but I was completely unprepared for the sheer volume and variety of disciplinary stuff that rises to the shirt/commander level. But just because it came to me didn't mean I had to take ownership of it and "micromanage" it. Much of my job was providing advice to supervisors on how to turn around their trouble troops. Let's face it, there are a lot of supervisors in a squadron and only one of me. Besides, that's what they get paid for. The last thing I wanted to be was the shirt who handles everything.

THIS!

sandsjames
03-27-2014, 10:42 PM
My supervisor asked to have it removed again today and she was told by the shirt that he doesn't remove anything from the PIF. When she asked what the reasoning was; she got told it was to protect the CC. So if somebodys paperwork was removed and that person ends up going to court for whatever reason, then leadserhip can't use that paperwork that was pulled out.

That's crap...that's such a huge problem. Has your supervisor spoken with the CC? Many times you'll hear from the Shirt or Super that the CC says this or that and when you ask the CC he/she never even knew it was an issue.

Sounds to me like you have a Shirt who's more worried about being able to boot someone than about keeping someone in. It's a bad situation.

LogDog
03-28-2014, 12:08 AM
No...this sort of problem would require a UIF, which can only be kept for 2 years. If an entire file dedicated to unfavorable information is good for only 2 years, then what can possibly be the justification for keeping a single file in a simple PIF for longer than that? It's asinine.
You're right, the serious infractions would require a UIF. As for the PIF, I am in agreement with you that it shouldn't be retained especially if the individual has corrected their behavior.

AF Comm Guy
04-03-2014, 03:09 PM
Do what I did, steal the PIF. Problem solved.

weezy
04-03-2014, 03:22 PM
That's what I was thinking about doing. "Hey, can I see my PIF?". Take out my LOR and then *SHRED!*. "Whatever LOR are you talking about?".

Stalwart
04-03-2014, 05:31 PM
Have you thought about requesting an audience and talking to your leadership (who hold the PIF) and asking them why they are retaining the LOR for this long? I would also just float the idea of you reapplying for the Honor Guard detail and asking the CC if this would again be a default denial due to the LOR. At least that way you would get the info from the horses mouth.

weezy
04-03-2014, 05:55 PM
Have you thought about requesting an audience and talking to your leadership (who hold the PIF) and asking them why they are retaining the LOR for this long? I would also just float the idea of you reapplying for the Honor Guard detail and asking the CC if this would again be a default denial due to the LOR. At least that way you would get the info from the horses mouth.

I did. I posted what I was told on page 6, post #58.

Stalwart
04-03-2014, 08:05 PM
My supervisor asked to have it removed again today and she was told by the shirt that he doesn't remove anything from the PIF. When she asked what the reasoning was; she got told it was to protect the CC. So if somebodys paperwork was removed and that person ends up going to court for whatever reason, then leadserhip can't use that paperwork that was pulled out.

That says your supervisor talked to them, have you done so directly?

weezy
04-03-2014, 08:28 PM
That says your supervisor talked to them, have you done so directly?

I have not since I am TDY. But I trust my supervisor... She's one of the good ones.

Stalwart
04-03-2014, 09:10 PM
I have not since I am TDY. But I trust my supervisor... She's one of the good ones.

I am not saying you shouldn't trust your supervisor. he/she may be great, but at this point if it were me in the situation you describe I would ask to speak with them at their convenience, face to face or if you are deployed beyond the deadline for your application on the phone and lay out my side of it, my questions, and have them tell me directly what I need to do to improve myself beyond the situation that (at least in their opinion is still relevant) etc.

Measure Man
04-03-2014, 10:00 PM
Removing paperwork from a PIF, and even closing a UIF early can be a tremendous motivator for Airmen.

It is a great opportunity for the commander to have a 5-10 min chat with the Airman, let him know that he is removing or closing the file, let him know his supervisor and shop chief are pleased with his work and conduct and pump him up for the future.

Heck, I even had a commmander close a UIF 1 month early...didn't amount to much in the grand scheme of things, but boy was that dude fired up after the commander told him he was doing it. It was a better thank-you than any quarterly award. It's really an opportunity for the commander to say "Hey, we notice what you're doing"

Absinthe Anecdote
04-03-2014, 10:16 PM
You're right, the serious infractions would require a UIF. As for the PIF, I am in agreement with you that it shouldn't be retained especially if the individual has corrected their behavior.

I can't see why anyone in the supervisory chain would want to remove an LOR or an LOC from a PIF until right before an individual PCSs or PCAs to another unit.

It has been a while since I read the beginning of this thread, but if it was not serious enough for a UIF, then it can't really be harming the individual just sitting in their PIF either.

It should stay in their PIF until at the very least there is a change of supervisors, but I would be inclined to leave in there until they depart the unit.

fufu
04-03-2014, 11:42 PM
I am not saying you shouldn't trust your supervisor. he/she may be great, but at this point if it were me in the situation you describe I would ask to speak with them at their convenience, face to face or if you are deployed beyond the deadline for your application on the phone and lay out my side of it, my questions, and have them tell me directly what I need to do to improve myself beyond the situation that (at least in their opinion is still relevant) etc.

This is the right idea. I think the question to be asked is: "What do I have to do, from a performance standpoint, to have this removed from my PIF?"

weezy
04-04-2014, 02:27 AM
This is the right idea. I think the question to be asked is: "What do I have to do, from a performance standpoint, to have this removed from my PIF?"

PCS/PCA. Every year I bring up removing it out of my PIF. And I do not know what else to do from a performance standpoint. I got a mark down on my EPR for that LOR, but still got 5's and I have received 5's on all my EPR's since then, did base honor guard, won Airman of the month, won Airman of the Year for my SQ, volunteer for over half of my SQ events, earned my CCAF, volunteered for two deployments, made staff my first time, etc. etc. etc. Please if you have a recommendation on how I could improve I'm all ears…. Or eyes I guess.

MACHINE666
04-04-2014, 12:22 PM
So I have had an LOR in my PIF for four years come this June. This LOR has gone through two CC's and I can't count how many 1st Sergeants. Every year my supervisor asks to have it removed and my leadership says they won't. I have looked at every records AFI there is and I have found nothing on PIF paperwork removal. Is there ANY route (chain of command/legal) I can take to try and have this LOR removed or do I have to wait until hell freezes over?

I know everybody is going to ask so... I got the LOR because a couple of co-workers were doing spice and I didn't report them. I got it. I fucked up and should have done something. Can I move on now.

Another little note. I applied for AF Honor Guard two and a half years ago and my then CC denied my package because of this LOR and I'm looking at applying again, but I'm not going to go through the whole package making process if my CC is just going to deny it again.

Take a dump in their coffee pot and call it a day....

:D :D :D :D :D :D

weezy
04-04-2014, 04:00 PM
Take a dump in their coffee pot and call it a day....

:D :D :D :D :D :D

Maybe I'll eat the LOR and then take a dump on the conference room table.