ARCHIVED - Canadian Forces Grievance Board

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

SECTION II – ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME

 

Program Activity Architecture

Program Activity Architecture
Review of Canadian Forces grievances referred by the Chief of the Defence Staff
Case Management and Research	Legal Support Other
Internal Services
Governance and Management Research Resource Management Services Asset Management Services

 

Program Activity: Review of Canadian Forces grievances referred by the Chief of the Defence Staff.

Financial Resources ($000's)

Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending
$3,348.0	$3,359.8	$3,325.2

Human Resources

Planned	Actual	Difference
28	29	(1)

 

Program Activity: Internal Services

Financial Resources ($000's)

Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending
$3,081.0	$3,415.8	$2,896.8

Human Resources

Planned	Actual	Difference
18	13	5

 

The Board conducts objective and transparent reviews of grievances with due respect to fairness and equity for each member of the CF, regardless of rank or position. It ensures that the rights of military personnel are considered fairly throughout the process and is committed that its Board Members act in the best interest of the parties concerned. The Findings and Recommendations it issues are not only based in law but form precedents which ensure coherence in the interpretation and the application of policies and regulations within the Canadian Forces.

As an institution vested with quasi-judicial powers, the Board must ensure that its recommendations conform to law and in accordance with its enabling statute and the relevant legislation. In particular, the Board members must be conversant with decisions taken by the Canadian courts in the various areas related to the Canadian Forces and that may affect the Board’s work or the grievances it has to review. The Board must respect the decisions taken by higher courts regarding grievances by CF members, including the Federal Court, Trial Division. The Board members shall be responsible for knowing, among others regulations: the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces (QR&O), the Canadian Forces Administrative Orders (CFAOs) and the Treasury Board policies which apply to the grievance in question and which help to support the analysis, and assist in the development of the Board’s Findings and Recommendations.

 

Expected Results

The Board’s Logic Model demonstrates how each of the items contributes to the fulfillment of the Board’s mission and the achievement of its strategic outcome.

Logic Model for Canadian Forces Grievance Board

 

click on image to enlarge

Immediate outcomes: These are the short-term results of the Board’s activities and its output.
Expected Result Findings and Recommendations (F&R) assist the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) in rendering decisions on grievances.	Indicator: % of CDS Decisions in agreement with CFGB’s recommendations. Data Source: CDS Decisions on cases Target: CDS agrees with 80% of CFGB’s recommendations.

 

Overview of CDS Decisions

CDS Decisions Received in 2007-2008

During 2007-08, the Board received CDS decisions on 95 grievances. The CDS was in full and partial agreement on 83 cases and in full acceptance of the informal resolutions on 4 cases which represent 91% of the cases he reviewed.

CFGB's Findings and Recommendations (F&R)	CDS Decisions Received in 2007-2008
	CDS fully endorses CFGB's F&R	CDS partially endorses CFGB's F&R	CDS does not endorse CFGB's F&R	Case withdrawn at CDS Level	CF Informal Resolution	Total
Upheld	1	4	2		2	9
Partially Upheld	2	5	3			10
Denied	58	5		3		66
Withdrawn*	8					8
Withdrawal due to CF Informal Resolution*					2	2
Total	69	14	5	3	4	95
* The CFGB issues Findings and Recommendations for all referred grievances even in cases of withdrawals and informal resolutions.

 

Informal Resolutions and Withdrawals

These informal resolutions came about after the Board had submitted its Findings and Recommendations to the CDS for a final decision, which in turn may have influenced the move to an informal resolution.

Three cases were withdrawn by the grievor subsequent to the issuance of the Board’s Findings and Recommendations, but prior to the CDS decision on their case because the grievors declared themselves satisfied with the explanations found in the Board’s Findings and Recommendations, despite the recommendation to deny the grievance.

Immediate outcomes: These are the longer term results, that flow from the Board’s activities, outputs and immediate outcomes, and which will demonstrate progress towards achieving its ultimate result.
Expected Result Better understanding and application of regulations, policies and guidelines governing the conditions of work in the Canadian Forces.	Indicator: % of systemic recommendations that merit further study. * Data Source: Review of progress through Canadian Forces (CF) Office of Primary Interest (OPI). Target: 75% of recommendations that merit further study are accepted. * Success regarding this performance indicator will be assessed through formal evaluations every 5 years.
	Indicator: % of CDS agreement with the Board’s recommendations regarding interpretation and application of regulations, policies and guidelines. * Data Source: CDS Decisions on cases Target: 80% agreement * Success regarding this performance indicator will be assessed through formal evaluations every 5 years.

 

Alerting the CDS to systemic issues

By the end of its first year, the Board realized that there were grievances reflective of recurrent issues, caused by rules and regulations appropriate for the military workplace, but not adjusted to address changing working conditions – let alone changing social mores.

It is important to keep in mind that in the military environment, rules and regulations must of necessity be followed rigidly. Adjusting employment policies to address variations is therefore much more onerous than it is in the private sector.

The Board’s mandate, however, does place it in an ideal position to identify systemic problems. Its full-time focus on grievances, its in-depth analysis of every case, its grievance-tracking systems, its ability to investigate all aspects of the apparent cause of a particular grievance, and its ever-growing library of precedents make it easy to recognize when certain types of grievances seem to be clustering around a systemic stumbling block.

The Board therefore decided that, where recurring grievances appeared to be triggered from systemic issues of which the CDS might be unaware, it would be useful to flag them in the findings and include recommendations that the CDS consider for further investigation. If the Department of National Defence (DND) could address a given issue, the likely result would be better working conditions, improved morale, and ultimately, elimination of future grievances related to the subject.

Consequently, at any given time, the Board keeps in mind issues that might be ameliorated through systemic changes; it has completed many investigations that have enabled it to include with its recommendations possible systemic areas for the CDS to consider further. The Board also believes that its systemic recommendations are among the major contributions it can make towards improving the quality of working life in the CF. Towards this end, the CDS response has been largely favourable. While not always in agreement on every recommendation, in the many cases where the CDS has agreed, he has directed the appropriate DND or CF authority to investigate further.

The following illustrates the types of recurring issues that the Board has recommended for further investigation, and describe the CDS’ responses.

Systemic Issues	CDS's response
Acting While So Employed (AWSE) Where the establishment for a rank is not filled by a CF member holding that rank, a CF member of lower rank may be carried against the vacancy, by the appropriate authority, for a specific period of time, subject to certain prerequisites set out in the regulations and policies. However, there are situations when some the requisites can be waived by the CDS.	The A/CDS followed the Board’s recommendation that a review of the AWSE policy be undertaken to determine if the spirit and intent of the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs (SCONDVA) Recommendation 12 is given effect. The A/CDS also asked the Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources - Military) ADM (HR-Mil) now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP) to examine whether the AWSE principles remain sound or require change and if the policy and the supporting processes are clearly communicated.
Aircrew Allowance (AIRCRA) Subject to any limitations prescribed by the Minister, an officer of the Regular Force is entitled, if he is a pilot and is employed in a flying position designated by the Minister to Aircrew Allowance at the appropriate monthly rate.	The CDS agreed with the systemic recommendation that the pertaining regulations on "continuous, substantial and sporadic exposure" to the flying environment be reviewed to ensure that clear-cut criteria are established to more accurately reflect the actual flying duties being performed as opposed to the organizational technicality of occupying a designated position. The CDS recognized that it has raised broader issues that merit further consideration. Accordingly, the CDS asked the ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP) to consider this Board's recommendation and determined whether the current CF regulations required amendment.
Annual Leave – Reserve Policy On March 25, 2004, CANFORGEN 046/04 announced changes to the administration of annual leave. The policy stated that, effective 1 April 2004, prior time spent in the Reserve Force would be taken in consideration for the calculation of annual leave when transferring to the Regular Force. However, this amendment did not consider changes to the requirement of having 28 years in the Regular Force in order to grant 30 days of annual leave.	Based on the Board’s finding that all members of the Regular Force, who have served 28 years, combined or not, deserve the same recognition for their long service, the CDS agreed with the Board’s recommendation that the leave policy be reviewed. Update: The Director General Compensation and Benefits has informed the CDS that the harmonization of annual leave entitlements for the Regular and Reserve Forces will be included on the list of policy development options planned for 2008.
Cadet Summer Training Centre (CSTC) The grievor grieved the practice of attach posting Cadet Instructor Cadre (CIC) members while Regular and Primary Reserve (P Res) Force members attended CSTCs on Temporary Duty (TD) contending that it was discriminatory. The Board recommended that the CDS amend the current instruction which requires CIC members to be attach-posted for CSTC duties while other component members are on TD.	The CDS directed the Vice-chief of the Defence Staff (VCDS) to conduct a review to address the question of inequitable treatment of Reservists employed at CSTC’s. The CDS added that this review should assess the need to treat CIC officers at CSTC’s differently than other personnel, and the feasibility to harmonize benefits.
Canadian Forces Superannuation Act (CFSA) Update: Reserve Force concerns/problems in relation to election to count prior service, entitlement to annuity, reserve pension plan, and reserve force retirement gratuity were addressed with the review of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act which was recently amended.	As recommended by the Board, the CDS asked that the grievors cases be brought to the attention of the CFSA Review Project.
CF Drug Control Program The grievor contested the administrative release from the Canadian Forces (CF) through the application of the CF Drug Control Program, contained in Queen’s Regulations & Orders (QR&O) Chapter 20 and Canadian Forces Administrative Orders (CFAO) 19-21. At issue is the appropriateness of the release. The Board recommended ensuring that assistance efforts are not thwarted the way they were in this case (it appeared that the grievor’s seeking assistance under the Drug Control Program had led to an undercover operation against her). Future willingness of CF members to come forward and avail themselves of assistance, and the success of the resulting CF sponsored programs, depend on members’ trust in the sincerity of the organisation seeking to provide assistance to its personnel who are trying to overcome personal difficulties.	The CDS agreed the release was inappropriate and offered re-enrolment with Counselling & Probation (C&P) conditions. The CDS also tasked the VCDS with looking into the Board’s recommendation and reporting to him in due course.
Compensate time when undergoing compulsory medical examination The grievor contested the decision to deny him financial compensation for time taken to complete his military medical examination. The grievor, a member of the Cadet Instructor Cadre (CIC), was instructed that he was required to undergo his overforty periodic military medical exam but that he would not be entitled to receive pay or expenses for the time allotted for the medical exam. The Board found that CIC members should be compensated for the time taken to undergo medical examinations and recommended that the CF amend its practice accordingly.	The CDS asked the VCDS to review the practice in light of this decision.
Dependant - Definition The Board issued Findings and Recommendations on this matter and noted that the different definitions of dependant pursuant to the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program (CFIRP) and the Compensation and Benefits Instructions (CBI) were cause for confusion for members of the CF, as well as those administering the policies. The Board recommended that the CDS direct an examination and review of the definitions of dependant pursuant to the CFIRP and the CBI, to clarify and harmonize the definitions with respect to the relocation of CF personnel and their families.	Considering that the different definitions of dependant pursuant to the CFIRP policy manual and the CBI were cause of confusion, although CBI 207 Section 9 is now under review, in light of this grievance, the CDS asked the Chief Military Personnel to integrate this finding on dependant's definition in the CFIRP policy review. Consequently, the Board's recommendation regarding the review of the current definition of "dependant" was endorsed by the CDS.
Dress and Hair Policies A Commander exceeded his authority in asking the grievor to remove the red highlights from her hair and requiring her to put up her hair in a “busby“ style. The Board recommended evaluating whether it is necessary to develop a policy that applies specifically to hair in connection with the “Busby” helmet worn during certain ceremonies and considering whether the current general policy is satisfactory or whether it should be amended or clarified for certain ceremonies.	The CDS agreed with the Board’s recommendation that a review be carried out to consider the appropriateness of developing a policy on this issue.
Incentive Pay Category A number of grievances clustered around the issue of pay changes that occur when a grievor has been transferred from the Reserve Force to the Regular Force. The Board recommended that the CDS take measures to quickly complete the review of the CF pay structure and the regulations that deal with vested rights and former service, and initiate amendments to Queen’s Regulations and Orders articles 204.21135 and 204.21535.	The CDS noted the Board’s recommendation and directed the ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) to initiate a review of these issues. The CDS has been informed that the review is being conducted by the Director of Pay Policy and Development (DPPD). He was therefore satisfied that this recommendation was being addressed.
Leave Transportation Allowance (LTA) In accordance with the regulation, this benefit is designed to financially assist members, once in each leave year where applicable, to visit family members or next of kin.	The CDS did not agree with the Board's recommendation that CBI 205.45 be amended to extend the Post Living Differential (PLD) benefit to all reservists serving on a full-time basis in a PLD area, nor that immediate consideration be given to reviewing and revising CBI 205.45. However, the CDS directed that ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP))review the grievor's observations and consider whether there was a need to further revise CBI 205.45.. The CDS directed ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) to revise the appropriate policies instructions that impose limitations on LTA to ensure they are consistent with the intent of CBI 209.50.
Overpayment The regulations and policies confirm the Crown’s right and obligation to recover an overpayment of salary or/and allowances to CF members, once an error is detected. In these cases, the overpayments constitute the grievor’s debt to the CF since he received payments he was not entitled to.	The CDS agreed with the Board’s recommendation that a standardized approach to the recovery of overpayments be adopted. To that end, the CF is presently exploring the feasibility of amending the National Defence Act and the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act to adopt a standardized and comprehensive approach to the recovery of overpayments, including the implementation of a system that would support longer times to complete the recovery so as to minimize the disruption to family finances caused by such recovery actions.
Post Living Differential (PLD) The PLD was designed to stabilize the cost of living of CF members and their families, especially when a posting required the member to move to an area of high living costs. Places of duty in Canada in which costs were above average were designated as Post Living Differential Areas (PLDA). The conditions of entitlement to payment of PLD are set out in QR&O article 205.45. National Defence Headquarters (NDHQ) issued several CANFORGEN messages describing the PLD benefit. There were some inaccuracies and omissions in these messages. Following the January 9, 2000, revision to the regulation, NDHQ issued a CANFORGEN message on January 23, 2001, which described the substantive elements of the regulation that had taken effect on April 2, 2000. The Board recommended that, when the policy on the PLD benefit, as expressed in QR&O article 205.45, be reviewed, consideration be given to harmonizing allowances between Reserve Force members serving on a full time basis and Regular Force members.	The CDS agreed with the Board's recommendation that the policy on the PLD benefit as expressed in QR&O article 205.45 be reviewed and that consideration be given to harmonizing allowances between Reserve Force members serving on a full time basis and Regular Force members. The CDS has asked the ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) to consider this recommendation and report on it in due course. Update: CANFORGEN 175/07 was released in November 2007, announcing amongst others, the changes regarding PLD with respect to Reserve Force members. Those reservists are entitled to PLD: When authorized to move HG&E at public expense to their place of duty for a period of nationally solicited Class B or C service; When a reservist finds subsequent reserve force employment within 90 days as opposed to one year in the same area.
Posting Allowance (PA) A CF member who has attained career status is entitled to this benefit when posted from one place of duty to another place of duty in circumstances that entitle the member to move their dependants at public expense or would have entitled the member to move their dependants. The Board recommended that a study be conducted on reservists’ work conditions, particularly when they have the possibility to work full time and for a long period. The Board recommended on another case to recognize Class “B” service as entitling a member to the PA on transfer to the Regular Forces when such transfer benefits the CF.	The CDS agreed with the Board's findings and recommendations, including the recommendation that a study be conducted on reservists' work conditions, particularly when they have the possibility to work full-time and for a long period. This study will include a comparison between employment conditions in the Res F and Reg F. The CDS asked ADM(HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) to take them into consideration and prepare recommendations.
Procedural Fairness Procedural fairness is essential when any type of process is undertaken that may affect an individual’s interests and rights. In accordance with this principle, a CF member has the right to be heard; in other words, to know the case against him/her and to have a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations and allow him/her to present evidence and arguments. The principle of disclosure guiding the release of information includes the right of an individual to know what has been said about him in a timely manner. Finally, procedural fairness includes the right to an impartial process and decision. The Board submitted systemic recommendations regarding: modifying harassment investigation policy to require reasons for decisions; acknowledging essential safeguards of having separate harassment investigators and harassment advisors; ensuring policy regarding Reserve members’ right to leave the CF are communicated clearly; review of the procedures governing Progress Review Board (PRB).	The CDS asked ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) to ensure that these procedures be revised to conform to the rules of Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness, and that he report to the CDS in due course.
Quality of provided information The Board submitted systemic recommendations in relation to information provided to CF members regarding: Posting Allowance; Quick Sale Incentive; and Restricted release. The Board recommended: that improvement be made to the quality of informaltion to members, in relation to financial questions; that measures be taken to ensure that those who re-enrol (or transfer) as skilled applicants in the CF understand its policies with regard to restricted release.	The CDS directed that the ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) bring the Board’s recommendations to the attention of the Director General Compensation and Benefits (DGCB) so that they can be taken into account in assessing the performance and governance of the relocation services program. The CDS asked that ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) consider the Board’s recommendations related to Restricted release and Posting Allowance and report its analysis in due course.
Relief from the performance of military duty The Board found that Class A Reservists should be able to rely on minimum service requirements as a basic commitment on the part of the Canadian Forces. The Board thus recommended that the regulations pertaining to relief from the performance of military duty be re-examined.	The CDS asked the ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) to re-examine the regulations pertaining to relief from the performance of military duty in the case of Class A Reservists.
Relocation Benefits The CF members’ moves are governed by the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program (CFIRP) which represents the Treasury Board’s approved policy for CF members on relocation of their Dependants, Household Goods and Effects (HG&E). The CFIRP provides options within a policy framework, to allow the member to choose specific relocation benefits in order to faciliate door-to-door moves, and to ensure fair and reasonable reimbursement of necessary relocation expenses.
Relocation Benefits – Home Inspection Fees (HIF) The Board recommended that the Quality of Life section study whether provincial home warranty schemes are equivalent in fact to the benefit of a professional building inspection of new as well as older homes; and that subject to the findings of the study, an amendment to QR&O 209.96(6) be considered.	The CDS has asked the ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) to determine whether the current CF policy and regulations require amendment.
Relocation Benefits – House Hunting Trip (HHT) The Board found that there was an inconsistency in providing for reimbursement from the core component up to a set maximum when child care is hired during the house hunting trip (HHT), but not paying anything from the core component when the same children are taken on the HHT. The Board recommended that certain corrective measures be considered.	The CDS asked the ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) to ensure that the inconsistency identified by the Board is examined, that the feasibility of an amendment is explored, and a report is provided to him in due course.
Relocation Benefits – Integrated Relocation Pilot Project (IRPP) – Customized Envelope The Board recommended that, when revision of the IRPP is discussed with Treasury Board, consideration be given to the issue of distance of the move in relation to the customized envelope.	The CDS requested that ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) consider the Board’s recommendation and report to him in due course.
Relocation Benefits – Integrated Relocation Pilot Project (IRPP) – Taxable Benefits The Board recommended that the CDS assess the impact of all direct and indirect reductions of the overall compensation available when conducting the final evaluation of the IRPP.	Professional cleaning and building inspection costs are taxable benefits, contrary to the information contained in the IRPP pamphlet. The CDS agreed with the Board's Finding and Recommendations, with the exception of the recommendation in favour of evaluating the impact of the direct and indirect reductions in the comprehensive posting allowance stemming from the final IRPP evaluation. Notwithstanding, the CDS was to bring this recommendation to the attention of the ADM (HRMil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) for appropriate action.
Relocation Benefits – Personal Motor Vehicle (PMV) The grievor stated that the choice of storage facility was made after consulting the experts from National Defence Headquarters prior to his posting. He indicated that he selected the most cost effective company, thereby saving the Department of National Defence a substantial amount of money. The Board found that there was insufficient information provided to the grievor, who should not suffer the consequences thereof.	The CDS agreed, adopting the Board’s reasoning with regard to his power to authorize reimbursement; he also endorsed the Board’s recommendation that the Director Compensation and Benefits Administration (DCBA) amend CFAO 209.47 to indicate more precisely what expenses qualify for reimbursement in respect of preparation fees relating to the storage of a vehicle at public expense.
Relocation Benefits – Pet Care Expenses The Board recommended that the CDS initiate a review of the CF policies and regulations pertaining to pet care expenses of members without dependents on attached posting, with the objective of allowing for the reimbursement of reasonable pet care expenses.	The CDS ordered a review of CF policies and regulations with a view of allowing the reimbursement of reasonable pet care expenses. In addressing this issue, the CDS asked the ADM (HRMil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) to consider the Board’s recommendation and report on it in due course.
Relocation Benefits – Transfer vs Enrolment The CDS agreed with the Board’s findings that a CF member remains enrolled when transferring from the Reserve Force to the Regular Force. Therefore he is entitled to have his furniture and effects moved to his place of enrolment and not his place of transfer where he was released.	Concerning the Board’s recommendation that the administrative procedures and documents be modified to ensure a clear differentiation between transfer and enrolment, the CDS indicated that he made such a request in a similar grievance and he was informed that a review was underway.
Relocation of Dependants After having been denied a posting to Newfoundland in 1996, the grievor asked a few months later that his dependants and his family’s furniture and effects (F&E) be moved to Newfoundland. The CF accepted this second request and had the grievor elect an Intended Place of Residence (IPR) to do so. He then requested that the CF reimburse his Real Estate/Legal Fees (RE/LF) The CF refused this request alleging that the grievor was foreclosed from any benefits related to the sale of his residence in Ottawa given that he had elected an IPR. The Board recommended that the grievance be upheld: early election for IPR move should be cancelled, as conditions were not satisfied, erroneous information was given and the grievor did not appreciate the impact of the election; grievor should be able to reimburse the Crown for IPR move, then have subsequent moves (+ RE/LF) considered for reimbursement. The Board recommended that the forthcoming Defence Administrative Orders and Directives (DAOD) on relocation consider allowing dependants to be relocated for compassionate reasons despite the absence of a posting for the CF member.	The CDS agreed with the Board’s conclusion and upheld the grievance, for different reasons: He found correct information had been given, but that the CF leadership's decision to grant IPR 11 years before retirement was unreasonable; and he rescinded the decision, found RE/LF payable, and that subsequent moves could be considered. The CDS agreed with the Board's recommendation that since no provision exists to accommodate the relocation of dependants of CF members without the member first being posted, the forthcoming DAOD on relocation consider, when a posting is impossible, allowing dependants to be relocated for compassionate reasons despite the absence of a posting for the CF member. The CDS asked the ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) to consider the Board's F&R and report on it in due course.
Situational Assessment In an harassment case, the Board noted that the Situational Assessment (SA) was not in writing and, therefore, could not determine what was considered by the Responsible Officer (RO) to decide that the allegations did not meet the definition of harassment. The Board recommended that section 4.3 – Situational Assessment (SA), of the Harassment Prevention and Resolution Guidelines, referred to in DAOD 5012-0, be amended to require that SAs be completed in writing, disclosed to all parties and kept as part of the record.	The CDS agreed with the Board’s recommendation that, in striving to maintain the principle of procedural fairness, the Harassment Prevention and Resolution Guidelines, referred to in DAOD 5012-0, be amended to require that all future SA be completed in writing and kept on record. The recommendation was forwarded to the Chief Military Personnel (CMP) and the Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources – Civilian) for review and consideration.
Spectrum of Care (CF) – Uniformity While the CF does have a policy on funding for in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments, the funding is limited. Consequently, the grievor was denied funding, particularly since he requested IVF for his wife, a non-member. The mandate of the CF does not include the medical care of non-members. While the restrictive nature of the policy covering IVF may be found to be discriminatory on the basis of sex, physical disability and possibly province of residence, these restrictions are justifiable. The refusal of funding reflects the policy of every jurisdiction in Canada that could provide medical funding for this procedure. In addition, there are risks associated with IVF and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) that justify the lack of funding at this time. The CF already monitors these new reproductive technologies for the betterment of CF members. The Board noted, however, that because dependants rely on their province of residence for medical coverage, the policy on dependant care may produce disparity of treatment offered to the families of CF members. The Board recommended that the grievance be denied, but that the CF continue monitoring developments in the area of reproductive technologies. It also recommends a review of the coverage offered to the families of members, particularly to ensure the uniformity of coverage offered throughout Canada.	The CDS agreed with the Board’s recommendation and asked the ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) to consider the Board’s recommendations in addressing the staff issue and report on them in due course. A decision was rendered by the Federal Court in this matter in October 2007 (judicial review of the decision of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT)). The Federal Court set aside the CHRT decision and referred it back to the Tribunal for redetermination. In February 2008, pursuant to s. 53(2)(a) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, the CHRT ordered the Canadian Forces to take measures, in consultation with the Commission on the general purposes of the measures, to amend its policy such that as long as the Canadian Forces continues to fund in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments for its female members, male members shall receive funding for the intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) portion of their infertility treatments.
Spectrum of Care (CF) The Canadian Forces Spectrum of Care (CF SoC) Review Committee determined the range of health care services to be included in the CF SoC. The five principles of care are guidelines and are not to be interpreted as rights. The Board found that the CF SoC principles are in fact a set of guidelines and not rights. The Board further found that the grievor did not meet the criteria for exceptional circumstances as outlined by the CF SoC Review Committee. The Board recommended to the CDS that the grievance be denied based on current CF policy for non-coverage of the procedure, which reflects that of the majority of provincial health care plans and the Public Service Health Care Plan. The Board recommended that CF policy on this issue be submitted for review by the CF SoC Review Committee to determine whether circumstances in which a member has been deprived of the custody and companionship of a child as a result of divorce or relationship breakdown, may be considered as exceptional circumstances. The Board further recommended a review of the National Defence Headquarters (NDHQ) policy documents to consider the removal of the ambiguity arising from the phrase “entitled to receive health benefits and services comparable to those provided to other Canadians through their respective provincial health care plans”. The Board recommended that the policy explicitly state that the specific exclusions apply everywhere in Canada, regardless of the medical services which may be covered in provincial health plans.	The CDS agreed with the Board’s Findings and Recommendations. He denied the grievance based on the current policy of non-coverage of the procedure, which reflects that of the majority of provincial health care plans and the Public Service Health Care Plan. The CDS was satisfied that the circumstances were not exceptional and would not trigger the application of discretionary power. The CDS intended to convey the Board’s recommendations to the appropriate authorities for their consideration.
Submarine Speciality Allowance (SUBSPA) This allowance is a separate monthly allowance paid to submariners who are qualified to the level required by the CDS and serving on submarines. The governing regulations also permit payment of the allowance to members in some training situations and to shore-based qualified submariners but only to those in a specific number of designated positions, currently capped at 75 by Treasury Board. The Board has issued Findings and Recommendations on nine separate grievances, all dealing with entitlement to be paid SUBSPA. Unfortunately, as a result of the explicit regulatory criteria, the Board has been unable to recommend to the CDS that he grant the SUBSPA to any of these grievors. However, the Board is very cognizant of the inherent unfairness and inequity of the current system and the negative effect that it must undoubtedly have on the morale of affected members.	The CDS recognized that there are more positions that merit designation under the current criteria than the cap permits. The CDS indicated that he was not prepared to exceed the current cap in the absence of clearly defining the way ahead for this allowance. The CDS asked the ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) and the Chief of the Maritime Staff (CMS) to take notice of the Board’s recommendation that the review of the SUBSPA benefit be accelerated. Update: The CDS reported that a review is actively underway.
Travel Allowance – Creation of a form for TA claims Given the confusion with Transportation Allowance (TA) and Commuting Allowance (CA), the Board recommended that a form should be created for submission of TA claims. This would prevent confusion for reserve units in the management of both claims, and for reservists entitled to TA.	The CDS asked the ADM (HR-Mil) (now Chief of Military Personnel (CMP)) that a form be created for the submission of TA claims.

Case Summaries - Summaries of other cases where the CDS rendered a decision in 2007-2008 can be found on the Board’s Website at http://www.cfgb-cgfc.gc.ca.

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page