# 2012-173 Careers, Cease-Training, Progress Review Board (PRB)

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2013–03–26

The grievor challenged the decision to cease his training, submitting that there was a lack of standardization in the assessment of his training performance due to a flawed assessment tool. He sought to have the results of the Progress Review Board (PRB) expunged from his personnel file and be permitted to continue the On-Job Training (OJT) portion of his training under an appropriate assessment scheme and with pre-established scoring criterion.

The Initial Authority (IA) found that the grievor was appropriately cease-trained after failing to achieve an acceptable standard despite being afforded ample training opportunities. The IA noted that the grievor had been provided with five OJT opportunities, granted two extensions and evaluated by a number of independent assessors, all using the same checklist and all reaching similar conclusions as to his performance. The IA concluded that the consistency of the assessors' findings attested to the fact that the assessment tool in question was not flawed and denied the grievance.

The issue before the Board was to determine if the decision to cease training was justified and made in accordance with applicable policy. The Board first examined whether the OJT instructions provided sufficient direction to effectively assess a trainee. The Board noted that the lesson specifications for the OJT were delivered through a formal course. The OJT module afforded the candidate the opportunity to put his training into practice and receive feedback prior to a summative assessment by a qualified Officer. The Board found that although checklists would not necessarily provide a perfect input/output mechanism to award a score, it provided the flexibility required by assessors to exercise their professional expertise and discretion.

The Board went on to examine whether the grievor was assessed in accordance with the direction provided in the OJT instructions and agreed with the findings of the IA. The Board noted that while the grievor was assessed as a good performer during the in-class portion and had acquired the necessary theoretical knowledge for the trade, four quarterly reports all confirmed the grievor struggled to produce satisfactory results during his OJT, as assessed by several independent assessors over a one year period.

The Board concluded that the decision to accept the recommendation of the PRB and cease-train the grievor was justified. The Board recommended that the Chief of the Defence Staff deny the grievance.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2013–06–26

The FA agreed with the Board's findings and recommendation that the grievance be denied.