MEMOS:CFAO/DAOD or other source for the # of days it must be returned to the mbr

[vojnik]

Was wondering if someone had any insight on  the number of days a memo ought to be responded to and returned to the mbr?

I did a search and found "14 day" response. However, since some paperwork has gone repeated "lost" and reappearing well-after the response was needed - I was wondering if someone could point me to an official source so I could actually reference it?

I was talking with some people at work who seem to remember a CFAO with this. However, since they are in the process of transferring them electronically, the best I could do was use the Wayback Machine - but to no avail.

 

[Occam]

For everyday administration, there is no "14-day" reference that you'll find anywhere.

Now if the memo happens to be an official grievance submitted under QR&O 7.01, you will find that there are strict deadlines for certain events to occur.

 

[Monsoon]

And since I see that you're Navy, you may be thinking of request forms or "official requests" that are tracked by the Regulating Office. These are supposed to be responded to within 14 days, and I think the reference is SSOs (or possible MARCORDs) since it's an exclusively Navy practice. The key here is that the forms have to be tracked manually and someone (i.e. the Coxn or RPO) has to be in the charge of making sure they get moved along; otherwise they'll go adrift.

Memos are just a form of correspondence and have no "due date"; the majority of memos that get sent have no expectation of being returned to the sender.

 

[gcclarke]

Oh, as well there are timeliness guidelines if the memo is in regards to a complaint of harassment. For example, the Responsible Officer must acknowledge reciept of the complaint within 5 working days.

For full details, if you're on the DWAN, you can have a look at the Harassment Prevention and Resolution Guidelines.

 

[vojnik]

Hummm....I know where I work just starting implementing the use of Minute Sheets which has resulted in a marked improvement in the framing or contextualizing of memo requests  and their subsequent support/denial.

However, I am a little disappointed  that asides from Harassment complaints that there is no strict time-line documented anywhere.  This leaves a lot to good-will and trust between the rungs of the CoC which may or may not be respected.

Essentially, without the return of the memo which ought to have some sort of date received/actioned indicated, how must the mbr (who is ultimately in charge of their own administration and career in the end) supposed to keep on top of things and document for redress issues a repeated pattern of legitimate requests getting "lost"?  Registered mail?  :-\

I find that the Military can be so meticulous in other aspects of document-keeping/paper-trails but curiously selective in whose memos reach the intended recipient.

Thanks to all for the assistance....

 

[George Wallace]

If you are really that concerned, why don't you take your original, and your personal file copy, to your Unit Central Registry or OR and have them "Time stamp" it with the date that the Unit received it.  Keep it in your personal files and then resubmit a copy of it after a period of time, if you received no reply.

 

[armyvern]

...

Essentially, without the return of the memo which ought to have some sort of date received/actioned indicated, how must the mbr (who is ultimately in charge of their own administration and career in the end) supposed to keep on top of things and document for redress issues a repeated pattern of legitimate requests getting "lost"?  Registered mail?  :-\

I find that the Military can be so meticulous in other aspects of document-keeping/paper-trails but curiously selective in whose memos reach the intended recipient.

Thanks to all for the assistance....

You're almost close with the bold remark above.

Go to your Unit OR or Sup section and request a blank DND728 Document Transit & Receipt Voucher.

If they don't have any 'hard copies' avail, ask one of those places to pull you up an electronic version on the DIN (they are avail on the DIN in an adobe format which can be filled out on-screen, then printed).

------------------------------
To order actual 'hard copies':  DND 728 7530 21 870 8443 Document Transit and Receipt Voucher ~ Unit of Issue: PG
------------------------------

Both your OR and your QM should be able to assist you with filling it out. As your file #, assign the number "1" (#2 to your second memo of the year etc), the year and your last three followed by a 'pers' (example below):

1-09/239 Pers

Columns on the voucher should read from left to right (IIRC - it's been a couple of months since I filled one in & I don't have one sitting in front of me):

QTY / UofI / SERIAL # (use your applic memo file #) / DESCRIPTION (self-explanitory)

Fill those in as follows:

1 / each / Memorandum 1180-1 (239 pers) / Memorandum to CO pertaining to Redress of Grievance 239 Pte Bloggins dated 14 Dec 2009.
------------------

At the bottom of the 728, there is an area where you can indicate whether a "receipt is required" and by what date. You also identify yourself here so that the pers receiving your memo can send the receipt to you.  In the "TO" block of your 728, address it to the CO etc (whoever your memo is addressed "TO")

Keep the "originator" copy for yourself & submit your memo "with" the other copies of the DND728 attached.

Additionally, you can add other remarks into the description block. For example, if you are handing in your memo to your Sgt etc ... you can put a remark such as this on your 728:


______(Sgt Bloggart Signs on Line)_______
"Hand carried for submission by Sgt Bloggart
                      14 Dec 2009"


Now, normal, routine memos should not be submitted to your CoC utilizing a DND728, but it's your call to make; if you are indeed experiencing "lost" repeated requests, then a DND 728 may be the way to go.

BTW: Sgt Bloggins should have no issues with signing for your memo from you if he has been involved in the hunt to track to track down your previous submissions; in which case, I'm surprised that Sgt Bloggins has not added a DND728 himself already ...

Hope this helps.

Vern

 

[vojnik]

ArmyVern / George Wallace,

Once again, I have to say it:  YOU TWO ROCK !!!

Thanks for the info - I will make sure those afflicted by these "administrative oversights" have some sort of recourse....


>

 

[DBF]

Following that advice would be the textbook definition of "administrative burden" and unlikely to get you anywhere other than released.  Why not try the direct route and talk to your CO?

 

[CallOfDuty]

Essentially, without the return of the memo which ought to have some sort of date received/actioned indicated, how must the mbr (who is ultimately in charge of their own administration and career in the end) supposed to keep on top of things and document for redress issues a repeated pattern of legitimate requests getting "lost"?

  Sounds to me DBF, that his administrative handlers are being a burden to him, and others in his unit.  So he is taking steps to correct the issue, and doing it with a system set up by DND.  Sounds good to me  :2c:

 

[George Wallace]

Following that advice would be the textbook definition of "administrative burden" and unlikely to get you anywhere other than released.  Why not try the direct route and talk to your CO?

I don't know about you, but I have always advised all my peers and subordinates to keep "shadow files" of their Pay Records and  Pers Files (keeping Posting Msgs, Claims, Crse Reports, PERs, PDRs, CF Expres, Med chits and docs, Lve Passes, etc.).  It is always a good idea to keep a copy of memos that you want actioned, and a record of when and where they went. 

What does the Career Manager have as a favourite saying?  Oh yes!  You are your own best Career Manager.

 

[DBF]

  Sounds to me DBF, that his administrative handlers are being a burden to him, and others in his unit.  So he is taking steps to correct the issue, and doing it with a system set up by DND.  Sounds good to me  :2c:

DND 728s are not intended for inter-unit paperwork.  I can assure you that I would annotate his DIVNOTES appropriately for each time I had to waste my time dealing with this.  It doesn't take too many DIVNOTE entries before admin action follows.  Why the resistance to approaching the CO directly?  That will certainly clear the air and reveal where the problem lies.  I have to admit that phrases such as "document for redress issues " tend to speak for themselves.

 

[DBF]

I don't know about you, but I have always advised all my peers and subordinates to keep "shadow files" of their Pay Records and  Pers Files (keeping Posting Msgs, Claims, Crse Reports, PERs, PDRs, CF Expres, Med chits and docs, Lve Passes, etc.).  It is always a good idea to keep a copy of memos that you want actioned, and a record of when and where they went. 

What does the Career Manager have as a favourite saying?  Oh yes!  You are your own best Career Manager.

Agree fully.  Not sure the relevance WRT my advice against using DND 728s to send memos within a unit CoC.

 

[George Wallace]

Agree fully.  Not sure the relevance WRT my advice against using DND 728s to send memos within a unit CoC.

Ah!

Clarity.

You made no reference to DND or CF 728's in your original post.

 

[Occam]

DND 728s are not intended for inter-unit paperwork. 

You have a reference for this, of course.

I can assure you that I would annotate his DIVNOTES appropriately for each time I had to waste my time dealing with this.  It doesn't take too many DIVNOTE entries before admin action follows. 

You mean you'd annotate his Div Notes appropriately for every time you wasted your time dealing with a subordinate's welfare were expected to do your job?  If a member has to resort to DND728s to document his attempts at resolving an issue administratively, then someone is not doing their job.  If it's not you, then your job in his/her chain of command is to find out who.

I thought that mindset had been purged from the Navy.  Clearly, it still lingers like a bad case of flatulence.

Why the resistance to approaching the CO directly?  That will certainly clear the air and reveal where the problem lies. 

If it's not to initiate a grievance, then what reason would a member have to request a meeting with the CO through his/her CoC?  If anything, the member is going to be privately chastised for taking minor matters to the CO.  I'm not saying there isn't a place and a time for it, but that place and time is when all avenues have been exhausted and the only thing left is to pursue the Grievance system.

I have to admit that phrases such as "document for redress issues " tend to speak for themselves.

What is that supposed to mean?  I've never seen that phrase before.

 

[armyvern]

DND 728s are not intended for inter-unit paperwork.  I can assure you that I would annotate his DIVNOTES appropriately for each time I had to waste my time dealing with this.  It doesn't take too many DIVNOTE entries before admin action follows.  Why the resistance to approaching the CO directly?  That will certainly clear the air and reveal where the problem lies.  I have to admit that phrases such as "document for redress issues " tend to speak for themselves.

Post your ref please.

PERs move under cover of DND728. UERs & PERs files move under cover of DND 728 ... often between sections in the very same platoon in the very same building.

When a loss report is moved from clothing stores to cust svc (both base Supply) - it goes under cover of DND728.

This prevents it's loss. Where is your reference stating that DND728s are not to be used for inter-unit communications? That is false.

Are you also noting on his Div Notes each time he has submitted his memo ... only to have it lost? Because if you are, then you'd realize that the "Admin problem" is not with the member, but with his higher CoC. As his supervisor it would then be your job to fix that issue, not to punish the member because his higher-ups lack organizational, planning and administrative abilities.

Instead you wish the member to go directly to the CO, thus circumventing his CoC and attempting to keep 'the problem' at the lower level, --- which --- given your statement regarding "I have to admit that phrases such as "document for redress issues " tend to speak for themselves." --- tends to show that you'd then probably turn around and nail him on his Div notes and PER with failing to respect the CoC.

Perhaps the reason his paperwork keeps getting lost is that he may have a supervisor just as biased as you seem to be with your quoted response above. His bosses losing his paperwork is not his problem; it's his bosses & it really is as simple as that.

 

[DBF]

Ah!

Clarity.

You made no reference to DND or CF 728's in your original post.

Mea culpa.  Figured it would be read in context to the email above it but I could have been more clear.

 

[George Wallace]

Just stepping back a bit.

Following that advice would be the textbook definition of "administrative burden" and unlikely to get you anywhere other than released.  Why not try the direct route and talk to your CO?

The best way to become an "administrative burden" in most organizations is to "try the direct route and talk to your CO".  Circumventing the CoC is the quickest way to be alienated by your peers and superiors.

 

[DBF]

Hummm....I know where I work just starting implementing the use of Minute Sheets which has resulted in a marked improvement in the framing or contextualizing of memo requests  and their subsequent support/denial.

However, I am a little disappointed  that asides from Harassment complaints that there is no strict time-line documented anywhere.  This leaves a lot to good-will and trust between the rungs of the CoC which may or may not be respected.

Essentially, without the return of the memo which ought to have some sort of date received/actioned indicated, how must the mbr (who is ultimately in charge of their own administration and career in the end) supposed to keep on top of things and document for redress issues a repeated pattern of legitimate requests getting "lost"?  Registered mail?  :-\

I find that the Military can be so meticulous in other aspects of document-keeping/paper-trails but curiously selective in whose memos reach the intended recipient.

Thanks to all for the assistance....

My reference for the quote "document for redress issues" came from the 3rd para above.

 

[DBF]

Post your ref please.

PERs move under cover of DND728. UERs & PERs files move under cover of DND 728 ... often between sections in the very same platoon in the very same building.

When a loss report is moved from clothing stores to cust svc (both base Supply) - it goes under cover of DND728.

This prevents it's loss. Where is your reference stating that DND728s are not to be used for inter-unit communications? That is false.

Are you also noting on his Div Notes each time he has submitted his memo ... only to have it lost? Because if you are, then you'd realize that the "Admin problem" is not with the member, but with his higher CoC. As his supervisor it would then be your job to fix that issue, not to punish the member because his higher-ups lack organizational, planning and administrative abilities.

Instead you wish the member to go directly to the CO, thus circumventing his CoC and attempting to keep 'the problem' at the lower level, --- which --- given your statement regarding "I have to admit that phrases such as "document for redress issues " tend to speak for themselves." --- tends to show that you'd then probably turn around and nail him on his Div notes and PER with failing to respect the CoC.

Perhaps the reason his paperwork keeps getting lost is that he may have a supervisor just as biased as you seem to be with your quoted response above. His bosses losing his paperwork is not his problem; it's his bosses & it really is as simple as that.

A-AE-000-001/AG-E00 Guide to the Divisional System. Halifax: MARCOM/N1, 1993.