# 2015-048 - Promotion

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2015–04–30

During the seven years following her enrolment, the grievor completed basic officer training and occupational training, and proceeded onto two subsequent postings. She also completed during the same period three of six courses required under the Officer Professional Military Education (OPME) program. The completion of the programme was a requirement for the promotion to the rank of Major (Maj). In November 2012, Canadian Forces General (CANFORGEN) message 219/12 announced the transition from the OPME programme to the Canadian Armed Forces Junior Officer Development (CAFJOD) programme, which required seven courses completed, or a combination of six courses from both the OPME and CAFJOD programmes. The CAFJOD courses were progressively introduced between 1 June 2013 and 1 April 2014.

The grievor was on maternity/paternity (mat/pat) leave throughout most of 2013, returning to work in December of that year. She had an opportunity to be promoted to the rank of Maj upon her return to work, however, it was determined that since she had not completed the OPME/CAFJOD programme, she did not meet all promotion conditions and could not be promoted at that time.

The grievor argued that, as a result of the poor implementation and management of the OPME/CAFJOD programme transition, her promotion to Maj was unduly delayed. She submitted that the courses she required to complete the programme were not readily available. She also stated that once the courses became available, she completed her three remaining courses in just over 6 months upon returning to work, and argued that had the courses not been delayed, she could have done so in just under four months. She claimed that she was not permitted to take OPME courses while on basic training, and that it would have been very difficult to complete any during one of her postings given that she was busy. As redress, she requested that her promotion to Maj be backdated to December 2013, including back pay.

The Initial Authority (IA), the Director General Military Careers, denied the grievance. The IA stated that the requirement to complete the OMPE programme for a promotion to Maj came into effect in 2001, and was again confirmed in 2003 through the publication of CANFORGEN messages. The IA pointed out that, throughout seven years of her career, she completed only three courses, and this lack of progress in the programme is what led to her ineligibility for promotion. He also added that in accordance with Defence Administrative Orders and Directives 5031-8, she had a shared responsibility with her chain of command to plan and complete the programme in a reasonable time frame.

The Committee noted that the grievor admitted she was aware early on in her career of the requirement to complete the programme to be promoted. Further, the Committee did not accept the grievor's argument that she was too busy to complete the courses. It was the Committee's view that the grievor's statement that she completed the three remaining courses in just over six months while working, when she hadn't done so in the preceding seven years, greatly weakened her argument of being “too busy.” In addition, her career path was quite normal and usual to any other junior officer, and the programme was developed taking into account what is expected of junior officers.

The Committee found that the change of programme was not the reason why the grievor was not promoted in December 2013. The Committee's view was that the grievor was not diligent and, for her own personal reasons, delayed the completion of the programme, which had unfortunate consequences. The Committee found that she was treated fairly and in accordance with policy.

The Committee recommended that the grievance be denied.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2015–06–03

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