• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Transition Group (Previously JPSU and DCSM)

krustyrl said:
Thanks for the prompt Recceguy, I will certainly do that.  Would it be the VA Ombudsman or the DND one.?

It is the DND Ombudsman.
 
So far,
Personally, I have had mixed results.

Problem  -  As a PRes, when completing required paperwork to the best of my understanding, four months ago. Attending the meetings, as I understood them, getting signatures as I thought.......notice NO Guidance from my local JPSU, my unit signed off of my paperwork and off it goes to Ottawa for approval, last month.

Solution  -  After a busy summer, last week I started asking my PRes unit where the approval was and the "deer in the headlights" response was the start of the fight and last minute stress that members should not need to be going through. I spent 7 days scrambling for answers, where if I had of better understood what JPSU does to start with, instead of relying on my Divisional System, I would have reduced panic stations and have better educated my own unit in the long run. I now have approvals, have offended my Div System and JPSU is glowing here for their efforts to meet a member's needs, but the phyric nature required to for JPSU to perform it's job has not built many bridges that were barely existant to start with. I can not stop praising the efforts of my local JPSU worker, he pulled it all together and let me know the few parts I honestly missed. He made it happen, so that Ottawa JPSU could approve my request. Based on my initial request, I would have been denied outright, and my PRes unit would have simply said "so sad".

While the above example admits pros and cons, the message is this is how an "informed PRes" member is challenged to apply and get the appropriate support, as and when needed. How many are lost due to systemic problems that I went through?
 
kratz said:
So far,
Personally, I have had mixed results.

Problem  -  As a PRes, when completing required paperwork to the best of my understanding, four months ago. Attending the meetings, as I understood them, getting signatures as I thought.......notice NO Guidance from my local JPSU, my unit signed off of my paperwork and off it goes to Ottawa for approval, last month.

Solution  -  After a busy summer, last week I started asking my PRes unit where the approval was and the "deer in the headlights" response was the start of the fight and last minute stress that members should not need to be going through. I spent 7 days scrambling for answers, where if I had of better understood what JPSU does to start with, instead of relying on my Divisional System, I would have reduced panic stations and have better educated my own unit in the long run. I now have approvals, have offended my Div System and JPSU is glowing here for their efforts to meet a member's needs, but the phyric nature required to for JPSU to perform it's job has not built many bridges that were barely existant to start with. I can not stop praising the efforts of my local JPSU worker, he pulled it all together and let me know the few parts I honestly missed. He made it happen, so that Ottawa JPSU could approve my request. Based on my initial request, I would have been denied outright, and my PRes unit would have simply said "so sad".

While the above example admits pros and cons, the message is this is how an "informed PRes" member is challenged to apply and get the appropriate support, as and when needed. How many are lost due to systemic problems that I went through?

I can say that this is not unique to the PRes. I have seen it the RegF many times as well.
 
The JPSU staff are just like every other federal employees, overworked and understaffed. My personal experience has always been good when I have dealt with JPSU. Be it for myself or my subordinates.
Just like all organizations there are good and not so good employees.
There does need to be more funding and more employees along with some retooling of the JPSU to improve it. More pers should be made  aware of the services they offer.
I had no idea what they offered until I required their services, this was my own fault for not educating myself sooner. But it should be a component of PD days, refresher training, indoctrination lectures etc.. the more people that know about it the better.

 
If I may weigh I here the right people have to staff the JPSU and the IPSCs. Sometimes we don't get it right.

Personnel that work in an IPSC often have to be the "shoulder to cry on"' , the one who has to kick butt, and break down barriers to ensure the soldiers assigned to their care are cared for properly and within regulations.

This is hard enough to do for healthy soldiers. Is exponentially difficult for the ill and injured, as many of our brethren are still woefully uninformed and educated.
 
milnews.ca said:
From the CF/DND Ombudsman's Twitter feed:
The Ombudsman has launched a review of the 34 Integrated Personnel Support Centres located across the country; report in Oct.

Notre Bureau examinera létat de chacun des 34 centres intégrés de soutien du personnel à l'échelle du pays.Rapport au début de l'automne.

And here's the Ombudsman's "Preliminary Assessment" (highlights mine) ....
.... Following concerns raised in a complaint to the Office of the Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces (CF) Ombudsman (the Ombudsman) along with several high-profile media articles written this summer, the Ombudsman decided to conduct an assessment of potential issues regarding the JPSU’s staff adequacy and its services to ill or injured CF members.


The interim review took approximately five weeks and was conducted in two phases.

Phase One – Data Review

Firstly, all pertinent data and feedback gathered during recent Ombudsman outreach visits were reviewed. Contacts with the Office were also reviewed to capture any JPSU-related complaints received over the past 2 years.


Additionally, material gathered from hundreds of interviews done in support of three separate Ombudsman investigations (Operational Stress Injury IV, Military Families, and Reserved Care Follow-up) was also reviewed.

Phase Two – Canvass of a Cross-Section of JPSU/IPSC Clients and Staff

From a JPSU nominal roll of 1921 clients (CF members posted to the JPSU) and 291 staff, we solicited comments from a cross-section of 16 staff and 177 clients. It should also be noted that an additional 3,000 CF members and 554 CF families receive assistance from the JPSU/IPSCs.


Three principal issue areas were identified for assessment:


    Staffing Capacity: Whether staff in the Integrated Personnel Support Centre’s (IPSC) client services and JPSU platoon structure is adequate for the numbers of ill or injured members seeking services.
   
    Training/Staff Skill and Knowledge: Whether JPSU/IPSC staff possesses the skills, knowledge, and training required to effectively support and administer to the unique needs of JPSU/IPSC members and clients.
   
    Other: Whether there are other current or emerging trends/concerns that affect the effective operation of the JPSU as well as miscellaneous circumstances that may impact negatively on clients.
   

Staffing Capacity – Ombudsman Data

Outreach visits to CF locations by the Ombudsman or his staff normally include interaction with IPSCs. Insufficient staffing was the primary issued raised by IPSC staff across the board. The loss of Reserve Force members - due to new rules on retired CF personnel not being able to work as Reservists while also in receipt of a Regular Force pension - was widely noted as a big loss to JPSU detachments across the country.


By virtue of the can-do CF culture, shortfalls in staffing were often addressed from within the JPSU detachments as clients sometimes ended up as staff members.

Staffing Capacity - JPSU/IPSC Staff and Client Interviews

60% of interviews referenced insufficient staff numbers relative to JPSU member and client demands.


The change in policy to not allow Reservists to work while in receipt of a Regular Force pension was cited as a strong contributor to experienced people leaving the organization.


Training/Staff Skill and Knowledge – Ombudsman Data

Feedback gathered by Ombudsman staff suggested that training should be enhanced to better equip staff to manage potentially difficult situations. The effectiveness of JPSU staff appears to depend more on individual personalities and experience than training programs or a formalized competency profile1.

Training/Staff Skill and Knowledge - JPSU/IPSC Staff and Client Interviews

60% of interviews suggested inadequate skill and knowledge for the job and suggested a need for training to improve staff effectiveness, comfort and confidence.

Other – Ombudsman Data

Demand for JPSU assistance appears to be high. Two thirds of the CF personnel seeking assistance are external clients of the JPSU (ex: not posted to the unit).


Over the past 2 years, complaints to the Ombudsman’s office about the JPSU relate primarily to delays in - or denial of - a posting to the unit. These are normally investigated/addressed on a case-by-case basis.


With the exception of one complaint received early in 2013, relating primarily to the management of the JPSU, staffing, staff care, and their impacts on service-provision, the Office has not received complaints about the quality of services provided by the JPSU/IPSCs to its clients.

Other - JPSU/IPSC Staff and client interviews

28% of members sought assistance from the Ombudsman's office for their requests to be posted to the JPSU.


48% of interviews indicated that the successful reintegration of CF personnel back to their units is not being effectively captured and communicated.
 

There appears to be inconsistency in JPSU relations with other units focussed on helping ill and injured CF members. Most are reported as good while some others were described as being less functional in the view of some JPSU staff.


Other miscellaneous issues affecting those posted to JPSU/IPSC were noted. The majority of these were attributed to policies or decisions that are not within the purview of JPSU (ex: delays in payment of pension and severance). These issues can often be addressed on an individual, case-by-case basis, with or without the involvement of the Office of the Ombudsman.

Action by CF Authorities

As noted in previous Ombudsman reports that looked into the care of ill and injured CF personnel, numerous civilian positions had been left vacant during the current period of public service staffing restrictions.


Director Casualty Support Management (DCSM) reported that the Deputy Minister has provided exemptions to the hiring of Class B Reserve members (46 personnel) as well as approval to staff all civilian positions which had previously been left vacant during government-wide Public Service staffing restrictions.


The Social Work Officer within DCSM is developing a national training package that focuses on staff resiliency. There does not appear to be other training needs identified within the corporate training program.


The Chief of Military Personnel commenced an internal review of JPSU staffing, training and support in August 2013.

Analysis

The JPSU concept is relatively unique within allied military circles. Lessons learned are a normal part of evolving and maturing a new approach to managing ill and injured military personnel. Observations made during this review suggest there may be a requirement to review overall governance of support offered to ill and injured members.


There is a consistent reporting of staff shortages and a need for better training to inspire staff confidence and resiliency while supporting and administering to ill and injured clients who are posted to the IPSCs.


Specific experience and training requirements do not currently exist for CF members posted as staff to the JPSU. There is also no corporate training plan in place that includes modules to enhance staff confidence and effectiveness in dealing with the unique needs of JPSU members and clients (such as challenges linked to mental health, addictions, rehabilitation and return to work). As noted above, resiliency and self-care training have been identified as developmental requirements and are currently being developed by the DCSM Social Work Officer.

Conclusions, Recommendation(s), and Way Forward:

The information gleaned during this brief assessment confirms that meaningful efforts to address acute staffing challenges and training needs will undoubtedly improve JPSU/IPSC management and administration/support of injured and ill CF members transitioning to civilian life or pursuing a return to work in the military environment.


As mentioned previously, some effort is underway to develop a candidate assessment profile interview. Due to the unique challenges of work involved in supporting ill and injured members, it is recommended that the CF continue to put measures in place in order to ensure the careful and appropriate selection of individuals posted to the JPSU as staff.


It is essential to staff the JPSU with the appropriate number of personnel, to ensure these personnel possess the necessary experience and competencies, and to support them with suitable training. As noted above, this effort is ongoing and the Office of the Ombudsman will continue to assess progress in this regard.


The issues identified in this preliminary review echo those reported to the Office of the Ombudsman through various outreach activities as well as recent systemic investigations. Although the Office of the Ombudsman does not intend to undertake a more extensive investigation at this time, it will continue to closely monitor and evaluate the efforts underway to address the concerns raised.

Media's summary here:
The watchdog that oversees the Canadian Forces is raising serious concerns about the signature organization the Harper government relies upon within the military to help speed the recovery of wounded soldiers.

Joint personnel support units across the country are under-staffed and lack experienced people to guide physically and emotionally battered troops through their career transitions, the military ombudsman said in a preliminary assessment released Thursday.

Pierre Daigle undertook an assessment last summer following a series of complaints about the centres, which are supposed to prepare the wounded to either return to their front-line units or be discharged from the military.

Troops who can no longer carry out their regular jobs because of a physical or mental injury are posted to one of 24 joint support units across Canada, where they have three years to recover enough to meet the military's universality-of-service rule, or leave the military altogether.

The centres, critical linchpins in a system designed to speed the recovery of injured and traumatized soldiers, came up in the House of Commons this week when Defence Minister Rob Nicholson insisted wounded soldiers are not being summarily hustled out the door into civilian life without due care and consideration.

In interviews with a few hundred clients and staff, Daigle's investigators found — among other things — that a government policy which prohibits pensioned reservists from working at the units is creating a brain drain ....
 
I read that JPSU is going to be granted a three year extension to continue to employ reservists that are ex RegF, I think it was 47 pers. I hope that is the case and that those that do get extended are acutally working in the the IPSC/JPSU's now to keep the experience where it needs to be. The staff at any IPSC I have dealt with have always been top notch. They can only work with what they have. Hopefully the employee shortage issues will get addressed before the pers that currently work at IPCS do not suffer from burn out. I know a few that put a lot of time in to get the job done.
 
stokerwes said:
I read that JPSU is going to be granted a three year extension to continue to employ reservists that are ex RegF, I think it was 47 pers. I hope that is the case and that those that do get extended are acutally working in the the IPSC/JPSU's now to keep the experience where it needs to be. The staff at any IPSC I have dealt with have always been top notch. They can only work with what they have. Hopefully the employee shortage issues will get addressed before the pers that currently work at IPCS do not suffer from burn out. I know a few that put a lot of time in to get the job done.

Well said. :salute:
 
stokerwes said:
I read that JPSU is going to be granted a three year extension to continue to employ reservists that are ex RegF, I think it was 47 pers. I hope that is the case and that those that do get extended are acutally working in the the IPSC/JPSU's now to keep the experience where it needs to be. The staff at any IPSC I have dealt with have always been top notch. They can only work with what they have. Hopefully the employee shortage issues will get addressed before the pers that currently work at IPCS do not suffer from burn out. I know a few that put a lot of time in to get the job done.

Speaking from experience in dealing with one of the JPSUs (and I hope they are all not like this) - it would be nice if the hired a few Reservists who have only been Reservists, as I had to do a lot of "explaining" and "educating" about Reservists issues/entitlements when I had to deal with them, and it sure would be nice to have someone who understands the issues.

And please, don't anyone turn this into a Reg vs Reserve "bashing" exercise.
 
Future Pensioner said:
Speaking from experience in dealing with one of the JPSUs (and I hope they are all not like this) - it would be nice if the hired a few Reservists who have only been Reservists, as I had to do a lot of "explaining" and "educating" about Reservists issues/entitlements when I had to deal with them, and it sure would be nice to have someone who understands the issues.

And please, don't anyone turn this into a Reg vs Reserve "bashing" exercise.

You do have a point. 

From my experience, not with dealing with a JPSU, but with the Training System, there is a big disconnect at times between the two mentalities.  My experience was in  finding positions on career courses, and even with Reservists (actually recently retired CAF members stepping directly into a Class B position at a School) in positions to Crse load, there is often an opening that comes up last minute and lands up being a NO FILL.  Unlike the Reg Force where a member could be told Friday that they are on Crse Monday and off they go, Reservists have full-time professions as civilians and all the administration involved in getting time off from those jobs.  Some of these people need a year in advance notice to book leave from work to attend courses.  Someone without this 'knowledge/experience' posting crses on short notice, even moving crse dates to the right or left as little as one day, prevents these Reservists from getting career crses. 

You can not always deal with Regular Force and Reservists in the same manner which is not always understood by the, for the most part, Regular Force persons in charge.
 
I am Reg Force and have been working at a Reserve unit for the last two years and I am still surprised at some of the differences. Especially the way injured personnel are treated.
It took me awhile to wrap my head around the timings for courses etc.. But once educated I got it.
Other than the obvious difference of part time/full time I find little difference between Reg and Res Forces as far as the people are concerned.
 
As a Reservist going through the process right now after snapping my leg like a twig a few months ago. Both my unit and the local IPSC have looked after things as best they can, that said their frustration seems to be with the system. I was handed over to them in early September and got the ball rolling, and now its November and we are still waiting for Division and Ottawa to sign off on my claim for the Reserve Force compensation that will last until I am cleared to go back to work. If it wasn't for my unit and IPSC working out an intern plan for my pay i'd be two months without pay right now. I have nothing but praise for the ex reg force case manager at IPSC handling my case, though when I did see him last most of his staff were on leave so it was just him and one other person. Maybe a 3rd case manager might help them when one is on leave.
 
In 2010 I was posted to an IPSC of the JPSU as an ill/injured member.  Since that time, as an ill/injured member posted to this unit, I have often been very frustrated with how my particular IPSC treats its members and makes decisions that have often been insensitive or not in support of myself and others I have spoken to.  Now as my 28 plus year career in the Regular Force comes to an end, I can't think of any regiment, HQ, school or any other unit that treated me as bad as this unit.

During all my career I have put loyalty first in my chain of command, unit and the Canadian Forces in general.  Now as I am about to retire, I find myself at my "wit's end" with my IPSC.

[size=12pt]Is it my perspective or are there other members who are having issue with their JPSU IPSCs?[/size]

Some general examples of my personal situation include:

a.    denying almost all requests, but particularly, without research and sometimes within only minutes or hours of receiving these simple and lawful requests that would assist for an easier transition to civilian life, denying them without any adjudication whatsoever;

b.    refusing to forward requests to higher levels where there was a clear entitlement but eventually submitting or approving them only on grievance;

c.    where there was no breach of service discipline of any type, using threats of disciplinary action as a practice;

d.    interpreting and applying career-ending processes that needlessly prejudiced some of the most important processes of my military career; and

e.    in general, treatment like I was a private recruit.

I can quote the specifics for me and others, but for this forum, this should suffice.

Previously as a junior leader in the infantry and then later as a senior leader in my current occupation, I have never treated, nor would I let my subordinates be treated, like I am being treated by this organization.

Again, surely I can't be the only one!
 
I really can't comment on what kind of pressures the JPSUs are going through right now.  I have colleagues that work there on a class B basis.  That may be part of the issue.  Understaffed. 

This is far from an excuse but...

Having worked in a client/service office, it really does not take very long for some people to get dejected.  You deal with a lot of crap.  A lot of undeserved crap as well.  In fact you likely deal with more BS than legitimate gripes.

What happens is that people who have legitimate gripes and concerns just get lumped in with the rest.

I'm not saying you don't have legimate complaints.  But for every legimate complaints there are likely ten times more that aren't.

It took me a long time for me to get dejected in that job because I had the right attitude for the work but eventually it took its toll and when it did it was time for me to move on because I wasn't helping myself or the organisation.  I just didn't care anymore.

The problem is when people who work in these jobs don't realise that they are probably past their past due date but stay for whatever reason.  But a lot of it also has to do with people not listening, hearing what they want to hear and not liking the answers they get.  You can blame them as much as you can blame the ones at JPSU.

Anyway, sorry to highjack and good luck with everything.
 
I appreciate your perspective and agree with you to some extent.  Definitely under-staffing is a huge issue with IPSCs - no question there.  And training and experience adds to an already overworked and understaffed system.  That, and the fact that it is still not an excuse being said, the issues I have are with those in decision-making positions.  Most of these people have good experience.

It is not just that I don't like the decisions, not only were some of them wrong by regulation, they could have been harmful had I not challenged them!  As for decisions that I didn't like that were not against CF rules, order or directives, my grip is that a "NO" was easier to say than a "We will look into it and get back to you."  In three cases, what should have been an issue and that should have gone up the chain of command and taken perhaps days either approve or deny, was denied "on the spot!"

For the last few years in the CF, I was THAT person making those decisions (although not part of a JPSU).  When presented with a request that I had to deny, at least I returned the denied request with a reason other than, and I quote the notations, "Not approved" or "Denied." This is even most important when dealing with career altering or benefit altering decisions.

One last point, when a member makes a well presented request, whether is it reasonable or not, the fact that it was well presented, well represented and at least approvable within the framework of current CF policy, the least an OPI can do is deny it with a reason; any reason; good or bad!

Thanks for the perspective and input.


 
krustyrl said:
My experience with a certain JPSU/IPSC was less than "supportive. Even my Wing Social Worker could not believe the way some were treated at the Unit. I personally think some at that Unit forgot they were dealing with members who are sick and injured both physically and mentally.

I realize we were still in uniform but were nowheres near accomodating to each members particular issues.
Totally frigged up my Depart with "Dignity" and I use that term loosely. Was considering contacting the WCWO after I was officially out, to see about my flag I was entitled to (after 27+ yrs) but that was the last item on DWD and was not up to facing these IPSC folks again. Eventually got my flag, which was co-incidentally flown on the wrong date and the Sgt i/c admitted he had "dropped the ball" with me and thought I already had the flag.  :facepalm:

I have totally waived my DWD with my IPSC.  I don't want them to give me a single certificate, letter, pin or anything.  With respect to not accommodation a particular issue; when I received my disclosure of information, as per the DAOD 5019-2, AR Process Table, I had 15 working days to respond. But on Step 9 of that Table, it states that DMCA will grant a reasonable period of extra time to respond if required.  I asked for two weeks as I had a significant re-evaluation of my complete medical condition with specialists that would likely effect my release process.  My request was denied within an hour of submitting my request and told that if I did not respond right away that no representation would be submitted.  The calamity of this is that the IPSC officer that denied my request, didn't even have the authority to do anything but send it to the CO and then to the DMCA AR Analyst.  I had to resolve it with a Grievance.  More stress!

I can go on, but I won't.  In reiteration, my IPSC will have nothing to do with any DWD of mine.  Sorry!

note: I dealt with 2 different JPSU/IPSC Units and one was certainly no better than the other.

*rant off*
 
Time has passed and I'm not quite as bitter but wouldn't change my words one bit. 
Edit to add : that training should be standard used allowing staff to be more knowledgeable. In my case my platoon Sgt had no idea there were different couloir CF Service Pins and when I was given the wrong pin, I was told " I never knew there were different pins, I must have taken a different SCAN Seminar than you did".  My reply was that the SCAN briefings were done by the same people as a traveling roadshow twice a year.

Just woke up my frustration levels now and I've been doing so well. Grrr.  :facepalm:
 
Hopefully this is the correct spot for this post.

I was advised my unit today that they wanted to try to get me put into JPSU because of an injury I sustained that will require surgery.  I know a few people that have this type of surgery and other than a 6-8 month recovery time which I'll be off for about 6-8 weeks I should be fine.  Other than that it's modified duties.  If I was in any other unit I would probably be accommodated during this recovery but this pace doesn't want to and the Career Manager won't someone else in there while.  While they acknowledged they don't even know if the file will be accepted, my question is whether I should try to have it denied.
 
There is nothing wrong with going to JPSU to get better.  That is what the unit exists to do.  You can ask for a return to work placement back to your current unit.  That would see you continue to work in your current unit while not filling a spot on the establishment.

Are you in a deployable unit? 
 
Back
Top