Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environment

[TU Curmudgeon]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

... My job, for 18 years, was to settle grievances in a military work setting and I watched people try to do some pretty ****ty stuff to each other. ...

Did you, like me, notice that Adm. Jackson's annual evaluations were pretty much "straight 4s" ("perfect" would be "straight 5s")?

Assuming that the US military works the same way as every other military in the world, then that means that the way that "the system" works is that anything LESS than "straight 4s" is the kiss of death for your career.

That means that, to me (and if my assumption that the US military works the same way as every other military in the world works), Adm. Jackson's annual evaluations were pretty much "low average".

Your impression is ...

 

[roguenuke]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

Did you, like me, notice that Adm. Jackson's annual evaluations were pretty much "straight 4s" ("perfect" would be "straight 5s")?

Assuming that the US military works the same way as every other military in the world, then that means that the way that "the system" works is that anything LESS than "straight 4s" is the kiss of death for your career.

That means that, to me (and if my assumption that the US military works the same way as every other military in the world works), Adm. Jackson's annual evaluations were pretty much "low average".

Your impression is ...

Ours are actually supposed to be based on a scale of closeness to a CO's average (member trait average compared to summary group average). This is important to look at when it comes to fitness reports (officer evals), what their average is compared to their CO's average for their grade. This can be very subjective as well. I know because I am responsible for writing/submitting evals for E6 and below Sailors (as well as my own) throughout the year. Officers work pretty similarly. There is a lot of personal opinion and politics that go into it as well, which is especially true for officers. The major issue is that it can be difficult to tell by just a trait average and especially based off of promotion recommendation average/numbers. You would have to basically look mostly at their Block 41s and determine how well that compares to other officers in the same position just to get a good basis for comparison. And even that can be obscured since negative things about a person tend to be left off of fitness reports/evals unless they are a "significant problem".

 

[NonoBadDog]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

Did you, like me, notice that Adm. Jackson's annual evaluations were pretty much "straight 4s" ("perfect" would be "straight 5s")?

Assuming that the US military works the same way as every other military in the world, then that means that the way that "the system" works is that anything LESS than "straight 4s" is the kiss of death for your career.

That means that, to me (and if my assumption that the US military works the same way as every other military in the world works), Adm. Jackson's annual evaluations were pretty much "low average".

Your impression is ...

I wonder why you edited out most of my post and didn't offer a link for his reviews. A person doesn't become an Admiral with sub par reviews. I did look for his history and this is what I found:
"As a White House physician in the past three administrations, Jackson has received glowing reviews from Democrats and Republicans for his professionalism and dedication.
Alyssa Mastromonaco, deputy White House chief of staff under former President Barack Obama, sent out a Tweet saying: "There is no one better than Ronny. No one. He is a saint and patriot."'
"He is a Navy diver and parachutist, in addition to his medical work."
"Jackson in 2006 deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom as the emergency medicine physician in charge of resuscitative medicine for a forward-deployed Surgical Shock Trauma Platoon in Taqaddum, Iraq."
"His awards include the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit, the Navy/Marine Corps Commendation Medal (four awards), and the Navy/Marine Corps Achievement Medal (three awards), as well as other individual, unit and campaign awards, the Navy said.
He is also designated as a diving and undersea medical officer, naval parachutist, Fleet Marine Force Warfare qualified officer, and submarine warfare qualified medical officer."
https://www.military.com/daily-news...mpressive-bio-little-admin-experience-va.html

Here is his last review from Obama:

“Ronny’s positive impact cannot be overstated. He is a tremendous asset to the entire White House team. Already at a level of performance and responsibility that far exceeds is current rank, promote to Rear Admiral now,”

https://www.scribd.com/document/377307788/Dr-Ronny-Jackson-Obama-Praise#from_embed

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

Ours are actually supposed to be based on a scale of closeness to a CO's average (member trait average compared to summary group average). ... And even that can be obscured since negative things about a person tend to be left off of fitness reports/evals unless they are a "significant problem".

Yep, pretty much like every other military in the world.

And I'll bet that the evaluations are "normalized" as well so that the number of "outstandings" in the unit gets brought more in line with the "average" number of "outstandings" you would expect to find in a "normal" unit.

Since the lowest number that you want to rank someone at is a "3" (out of 5) then that means that "mid-range" is "4" (out of 5) and an evaluation without any "3" or "5" ratings means "average" and not "above average".

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

I wonder why you edited out most of my post and didn't offer a link for his reviews.

Because that link was already on the thread and because the remainder of your post was irrelevant to my question.

In any event, Adm. Jackson is now irrelevant to the political scene and I am sure that he can look forward to his next posting to some exotic location.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

Because that link was already on the thread and because the remainder of your post was irrelevant to my question.

In any event, Adm. Jackson is now irrelevant to the political scene and I am sure that he can look forward to his next posting to some exotic location.

I am responding to your post where you make a claim. Provide the link.

Actually it looks like the allegations launched by Tester might all be false. If that shakes out Tester might find himself fighting an uphill battle for reelection. Karma.

The White House on Friday said an investigation did not uncover any evidence that Jackson ever drunkenly wrecked a government vehicle and the Secret Service on Thursday denied that it intervened to prevent Jackson from disturbing Obama in 2015.

"The Secret Service has no such record of any incident ... a thorough review of internal documents related to all Presidential foreign travel that occurred in 2015, in addition to interviews of personnel who were present during foreign travel that occurred during the same timeframe, has resulted in no information that would indicate the allegation is accurate," the agency said in a statement.

http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...egations-surrounding-va-nominee-proving-false

https://www.denverpost.com/2018/04/27/ronny-jackson-allegations-explained/
http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/385199-secret-service-denies-jackson-door-banging-incident
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b937a893a1d1

 

[ElChupacabra]

Re: Senate panel narrowly endorses Mike Pompeo for secretary of state after Trump intervenes with ke

Again, your anger is misdirected. Neither I, Janfu, The Washington Post, the New York Times, the DNC or George Soros ordered the White House to not vet Jackson in advance before appointing somebody with no management experience to the Department of Veteran Affairs. If the White House had looked for somebody with management experience and had vetted him, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Last I checked management experience is not a requirement; Ben Carson anyone? Or heck, Trump for that matter.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

Actually it looks like the allegations launched by Tester might all be false. If that shakes out Tester might find himself fighting an uphill battle for reelection. Karma.

Indeed, some of them might.

Some of them might also be true.

I suspect that you don't have a lot of experience in the military's "performance review process".

 

[NonoBadDog]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

Indeed, some of them might.

Some of them might also be true.

I suspect that you don't have a lot of experience in the military's "performance review process".

28 years in the Army. Yeah, I do.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

28 years in the Army. Yeah, I do.

At the O-4 and O-4+ level?

 

[NonoBadDog]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

At the O-4 and O-4+ level?

No. I did work with the G-1 and above level. Your statement was :

Indeed, some of them might.

Some of them might also be true.

I suspect that you don't have a lot of experience in the military's "performance review process".

I stated that I had 28 years experience working with the "military's "performance review process"". You moved the goal posts.

You still haven't answered all of my arguments that you edited out. You still haven't produced that link with his sub par ratings. You still haven't addressed the fitness report that I produced that said exactly the opposite of what you claimed about his sub par fitness reports.




You keep moving goal posts and avoiding the arguments. When you decide to have an honest discussion let me know.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

No. I did work with the G-1 and above level.

"G-1" is not a "level". "G-1" refers to a group of officers and enlisted personnel that are responsible for the administrative, operational and logistical needs of its unit and, as such can have personnel from E-1 right up to O-9.

I stated that I had 28 years experience working with the "military's "performance review process"". You moved the goal posts.

I thought that I was asking for clarification. People who work with evaluations for "E-??" don't necessarily use the same criteria as people who work with evaluations for "O-??".

You still haven't answered all of my arguments that you edited out.

Quite right, I hadn't intended to respond to them either.

You still haven't produced that link with his sub par ratings.

I think that you and I are using different definitions for "sub-par". In a millieu where 4 out of 5 is the barely acceptable middle, then any ranking that isn't 5 out of five is likely to end up being "sub-par".

You still haven't addressed the fitness report that I produced that said exactly the opposite of what you claimed about his sub par fitness reports.

You have produced only one page of his annual evaluation.

You should also consider that it is quite possible for someone to be "outstanding" in a very small personnel pool that has a limited task and which can hand their duties off to others at any time while that person would be an absolute bust if they actually had to do anything significant. (I once knew a doctor who had a marvellous reputation with his patients even though his knowledge of medicine was incredibly insufficient. This doctor was a real whiz at dermatology, but an almost total bust at anything else but couldn't get "Board Certified" in Dermatology because he was from Hungary. What this doctor DID know how to do was to figure out which other doctor to refer his patients who did NOT have dermatological problems to and how to follow their treatment regimes to see if they were improving. Of course, the other doctors reciprocated by referring all of their patients with dermatological problems to him. This doctor would, in the context of his own practice have received a very satisfactory annual review, but in the global context would be marked down as "Do NOT Promote".)

 

[dcsports]

Re: Senate panel narrowly endorses Mike Pompeo for secretary of state after Trump intervenes with ke

Last I checked management experience is not a requirement; Ben Carson anyone? Or heck, Trump for that matter.

'lack of management experience' is an excuse. That wasn't a problem when Obama ran for the presidency. He routinely appointed people to cabinet positions from either political office (Hillary for example) or academia, with no management experience. Democrats are going to throw a tantrum no matter who is nominated by Trump.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

"G-1" is not a "level". "G-1" refers to a group of officers and enlisted personnel that are responsible for the administrative, operational and logistical needs of its unit and, as such can have personnel from E-1 right up to O-9.
I thought that I was asking for clarification. People who work with evaluations for "E-??" don't necessarily use the same criteria as people who work with evaluations for "O-??".

The E-1 through E-4 is one eval system. E-5 through E-9 is another system. O-1 through 0-12 is another eval system. That doesn't matter. We are talking about one evaluation of one person. All evaluations are run on the same system based on task, condition and standards. The forms are different and more critical as they go up. They required more information to justify rankings as they get higher. That is the main difference.

Quite right, I hadn't intended to respond to them either.

Not surprised.

I think that you and I are using different definitions for "sub-par". In a millieu where 4 out of 5 is the barely acceptable middle, then any ranking that isn't 5 out of five is likely to end up being "sub-par".

And you still haven't provided the link that validates your claim that his ratings were "4".

You have produced only one page of his annual evaluation.

I provided the link to his whole evaluation. The picture that I provided was the next to last page with Obama's direct input. You chose not to look at the link. You have not provided the link to your claim that he only got 4's. Here is a pic of the last page from the eval he got from Obama. It shows his ratings in all fields. All of his ratings are 5's.

You should also consider that it is quite possible for someone to be "outstanding" in a very small personnel pool that has a limited task and which can hand their duties off to others at any time while that person would be an absolute bust if they actually had to do anything significant. (I once knew a doctor who had a marvellous reputation with his patients even though his knowledge of medicine was incredibly insufficient. This doctor was a real whiz at dermatology, but an almost total bust at anything else but couldn't get "Board Certified" in Dermatology because he was from Hungary. What this doctor DID know how to do was to figure out which other doctor to refer his patients who did NOT have dermatological problems to and how to follow their treatment regimes to see if they were improving. Of course, the other doctors reciprocated by referring all of their patients with dermatological problems to him. This doctor would, in the context of his own practice have received a very satisfactory annual review, but in the global context would be marked down as "Do NOT Promote".)

Again, you are making false claims without providing the link where you get this information. Obama says, "Promote to Rear Admiral now" with Obama underlining "now". On the last page Obama says, "Dr. Jackson is a great doctor and leader- would make great 2 star material".

Like I said. when you want to have an honest and serious discussion let me know.

 

[Waddy]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

The VA swamp doen't want an outsider coming in and cleaning up the place. So time to manufacture some dirt.

 

[roguenuke]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

The E-1 through E-4 is one eval system. E-5 through E-9 is another system. O-1 through 0-12 is another eval system. That doesn't matter. We are talking about one evaluation of one person. All evaluations are run on the same system based on task, condition and standards. The forms are different and more critical as they go up. They required more information to justify rankings as they get higher. That is the main difference.

Actually no. In the Navy, E1 - E6 are all evaluated with the same form, E7 - E9 with another (which is very similar to the E1-E6 evals, just for Chiefs and some differences that deal with importance of factors), and officers are evaluated using a different form (which like Chief evals emphasize importance of certain officer related factors). However, the evaluations themselves are quite similar.

They require no more information than those of lower ranks (in fact, in general, the most important evals for the Navy are E5 and E6, which require incredible amounts of information). I've written evaluations many times with far more information, qualitative/quantitative information than the one you provided for Adm. Jackson. In fact, it isn't preferred to have an eval/fitness report that is 1 of 1 (as that one was) due to the fact that it would be difficult to compare how well that person did in the eyes of their CO as compared to the rest of those at the same level, and in a similar position.

 

[roguenuke]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

The E-1 through E-4 is one eval system. E-5 through E-9 is another system. O-1 through 0-12 is another eval system. That doesn't matter. We are talking about one evaluation of one person. All evaluations are run on the same system based on task, condition and standards. The forms are different and more critical as they go up. They required more information to justify rankings as they get higher. That is the main difference.


Not surprised.




And you still haven't provided the link that validates your claim that his ratings were "4".


I provided the link to his whole evaluation. The picture that I provided was the next to last page with Obama's direct input. You chose not to look at the link. You have not provided the link to your claim that he only got 4's. Here is a pic of the last page from the eval he got from Obama. It shows his ratings in all fields. All of his ratings are 5's.

View attachment 67232321



Again, you are making false claims without providing the link where you get this information. Obama says, "Promote to Rear Admiral now" with Obama underlining "now". On the last page Obama says, "Dr. Jackson is a great doctor and leader- would make great 2 star material".

Like I said. when you want to have an honest and serious discussion let me know.

That's not a Navy fitrep. I have copies on my computer because we use a specific program and a specific BUPERS manual that must be followed for official Navy fitreps. That is not the right one for Navy officers. The earlier one you posted was an official navy fitrep, this one is not.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Re: Ronny Jackson, Trump’s V.A. Nominee, Faces Claims of Overprescription and Hostile Work Environme

In fact, it isn't preferred to have an eval/fitness report that is 1 of 1 (as that one was) due to the fact that it would be difficult to compare how well that person did in the eyes of their CO as compared to the rest of those at the same level, and in a similar position.

I suspect that the "reliability" of the assessment (as opposed to the "authenticity" of the assessment) can best be judged by the fact that Adm. Jackson is highly likely to be posted to some position just a bit less "high profile" than "White House Physician".

The odds that the fitness report will be "retracted" are low (and one does wonder why someone who wasn't the next level up in Adm. Jackson's chain of command would be doing Adm. Jackson's fitness report in the first place). On the other hand, the odds on Adm. Jackson ever being promoted again aren't much better.

PS - I wonder who signed it because this person

most certainly didn't