3
3
0
Here's the scenario: A centralized promotion board is meeting and the members receive a pile of records. In those records are an ERB, and the past 5 evaluations.
Catch: No where on those records or ERB is there any mention of gender or race. Evaluations that have gender describing terms such as "him, her, his" are redacted. This way you are only referencing what that person has accomplished. Thee is no photo in the record.
Once you have determined based on evaluation of performance and potential who you are selecting for promotion will you be advised on their gender, race and see their photo.
Is this fair?
I pose this question to students all the time so based on replies I will add other key points.
Catch: No where on those records or ERB is there any mention of gender or race. Evaluations that have gender describing terms such as "him, her, his" are redacted. This way you are only referencing what that person has accomplished. Thee is no photo in the record.
Once you have determined based on evaluation of performance and potential who you are selecting for promotion will you be advised on their gender, race and see their photo.
Is this fair?
I pose this question to students all the time so based on replies I will add other key points.
Posted in these groups: 
EO
Promotion Board
EO Promotion Board
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 12
4
4
0
I do think that it is fair. By removing gender, race, etc... you remove cognitive bias from the equation of those sitting on the board.
(4)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Agreed, promotion is supposed to be based on performance, potential and nothing else. Your gender, race or anything else not related to what you are asked to do for the Army should have no bearing.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
I think the photo does play a factor when it comes to the centralized boards. I have read a few AAR's of those boards and year after there are still SSG's that are trying to get promoted that can't even get there photo right, placing awards in the wrong precedence and so on also as there weight increases as does there height on the DA 2166-8. I do believe they should focus more on the performance of the individual. From what I hear they only have 3-5 minutes to look at your records consisting of ERB, photo and evaluations and here recently they can view all your evaluations to include the restricted file. Not sure how true on the restricted portion but I think that the board should be able to look at the total package and not just a portion. Allow them more time to adequatly look at the record instead of thumb through it.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
Why can't gender and race be displayed? The Army isn't selecting based on this...don't see the big deal.
(2)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Ok SGM I will step down off the box. However as stated above you do not have access to anything other than ERB and evaluations.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I ask that when you get the chance to review Christian vs US. This was a landmark case many years ago but points to the basis of this scenario. While this case was more about forced retirement it still points toward the "goal"
http://www.adversity.net/military_court_97-165C.htm
http://www.adversity.net/military_court_97-165C.htm
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google