Read on Twitter
As promised many moons ago, here is my thread on the service complaint process.
I have some experience as a presiding officer and 1 experience of submitting a complaint; I would not say I am, by any stretch, an expert. These are just my observations.
I have some experience as a presiding officer and 1 experience of submitting a complaint; I would not say I am, by any stretch, an expert. These are just my observations.
My advice to anyone about to go through it is as follows:
1. Prepare yourself. You’re going to feel horrible. It’s going to consume you because you will think about it all day every day. You will feel like everyone is talking about you. Know that they are not.
1. Prepare yourself. You’re going to feel horrible. It’s going to consume you because you will think about it all day every day. You will feel like everyone is talking about you. Know that they are not.
2. Take the emotion out of it. This shouldn’t be a witch hunt, so just look at the facts. Do some serious looking in the mirror. Could you have done more? You’ll be asked some tough questions during the process so face up to them now.
3. Know what outcome you want. A physically defined outcome is best (financial, etc) where as something like “an apology” can’t be ordered even if the investigation falls entirely in your favour. I’d suggest “acknowledgement of errors” is probably better and can come from the CoC
4. Lean on trusted friends. You need kahunas to go through with a service complaint, you’ll need support. Understand that it almost certainly won’t go entirely your way. It’ll be “yeah you were wronged, but...” and even if it does go your way, it won’t feel like it.
5. Remember, there is someone on the other end of the complaint. They might not even understand what they did wrong. It will be consuming them too (unless they’re a complete asshole).
Some expectation management then.
There is a strict process (JSP 831). You will need to fill in the Annex F within 3months of the complaint. Important to note that you cannot simply put the situation you endured down on paper and expect the investigating Team to figure it out.
There is a strict process (JSP 831). You will need to fill in the Annex F within 3months of the complaint. Important to note that you cannot simply put the situation you endured down on paper and expect the investigating Team to figure it out.
You will need to point the finger at who you think wronged you (“The chain of command” doesn’t cut it either). Clearly this is rather uncomfortable as there’s a good chance it’ll be someone senior to you within your reporting chain.
Before we’ve even started then there are red flags.
Firstly, 3 month time limit? Why? I take it the theory is that it couldn’t have been that bad if you didn’t bother your arse within 3 months of it happening.
Firstly, 3 month time limit? Why? I take it the theory is that it couldn’t have been that bad if you didn’t bother your arse within 3 months of it happening.
Secondly, You HAVE to accuse someone. What if you accuse the wrong person? What if you don’t fully understand the situation? What if it’s your 1RO and you’re concerned about the repercussions?
Why not let the investigating team figure out who was responsible?
Why not let the investigating team figure out who was responsible?
Before you start drafting your complaint, get a good assisting officer. This individual will help with everything from proof reading your complaint to moral support and ensuring the process is followed fairly. I recommend either a very gobby DE whos done stuff, or a LE!
If you don’t pick one yourself you’ll have one assigned to you but you probably want to take the lead here - pick someone with a bit of rank who is able to stand up to the CoC, but also someone who is liked and respected.
Once you’ve submitted your complaint you’ll be interviewed by the specified officer (usually the CO) who decides if there is a grievance. Note he/she is not presiding over admissibility, merely the format and whether it has what needs to be in there to be judged admissible or not
The criteria that will need to be met is in JSP 831 - read it in relation to your complaint before you go in for interview with the SO.
A good SO will be very straight down the line with you. My experience is that between him/her, the adjutant and your AO, all emotion is taken out of it and it’s simply a case of following the tick boxes in JSP831. My advice then, is to take what they say at face value
That said, there’s another red flag here; no matter how professional your CO is, they are intimately involved because you’re complaining about one of their people. People they command, and who’s actions reflect on them. Theres no denying that its nerve wracking and takes guts
Assuming the SO agrees there is a grievance, the complaint will be sent to Bde/Div legal to have its admissibility as a complaint judged, upon which it will likely be sent back to the unit in order for an investigating officer to be assigned, accused notified and AOs assigned.
Hold on a minute, the investigation is done in house? Yes, that’s correct. Here lies the biggest flaw with the system; anyone can be given the job of investigating the complaint. In reality most CO’s will find someone as impartial as they can.
But there’s a lot of trust going on there. I’ve seen an Ops WO who worked in the office next door to the CO investigate a SC against the CO (who was his 1RO).
Let’s be totally honest, this system is messed up from the start. Incident happens - you then have to submit your complaint to the Adjt, be interviewed by the CO and then be investigated by individual(s) of the organisation of which the accused is a member?
It doesn’t encourage people to seek justice does it. Yes, you can appeal, but that’s after months of feeling like an outsider in your place of work and then will take months more before the SCO gets round to looking at it.
Basically though, be prepared for a long uncomfortable experience. It’s an integrity matter and one that you should take pride in knowing that you had the minerals to go through with. Also, in my experience, once one is submitted it often opens the floodgates.
That said, if you’re on the receiving end, try not to take it personally (unless you were a complete dick) and use it as critical feedback. As with the accuser, do some long looking in the mirror and know that holding your hands up early can save a whole lot of pain if applicable
We don’t just ask an organisation to investigate itself, we ask sub-units of an organisation to investigate itself; the people who process and investigate the complaint work with, socialise and report on one another.
What’s baffling though is that it’s easily solved. Why not pair regts for dealing with SC’s. So 1regt processes all SC’s for 2regt and vice versa. That would take away a lot of the perceived partiality.
The premise of the SC is solid. Just the execution is fundamentally flawed
The premise of the SC is solid. Just the execution is fundamentally flawed
