# 2016-229 - Reserve Employment Opportunity (REO)

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2017–04–11

When the grievor was chosen for a reserve class B position, he was offered a 28-month period of service. He submitted that the employment status as written in the statement of understanding (SOU) did not comply with established regulations in that the period was less than three years. In addition, he alleged that the reserve employment opportunity (REO) was not administered correctly, as it had been posted as a permanent position and all REOs associated with a permanent position were supposed to be three-year employment opportunities with the possibility of an extension.

The Commander Canadian Army Doctrine and Training Centre, acting as the initial authority (IA), denied the grievance. The IA determined that the SOU had been drafted and administered in accordance with all of the applicable regulations. He explained that the approving authority had the discretion to formulate REOs that reflect the requirements of the position as closely as possible in accordance with the existing policies and legislation.

The Committee had to determine whether or not the length of the period of service offered to the grievor complied with regulations and whether or not the REO was administered in accordance with the applicable policies.

Under article 9.07 of the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces and Canadian Forces Military Personnel Instruction (CF Mil Pers Instr) 20/04, for reserve class B service, the CAF are not required to offer a minimum period of service that is longer than 13 consecutive days. Moreover, the applicable regulations and policies do not impose any requirement to offer a three-year period of service with the possibility of an extension. Rather, CF Mil Pers Instr 20/04 sets out that, for reserve class B service, a “CF member cannot exceed a maximum of six years in the same position without an additional notification message.” This clause refers to the publication of reserve service opportunities and the selection process and makes no provision for any right to an extension.

As such, the Committee found that the length of the reserve service specified in the SOU complied with established regulations and that the REO was administered in accordance with the applicable policies.

The Committee recommended that the grievance be denied.

FA Decision Summary

The Final Authority, the Commander of the Canadian Army, has stated his agreement with the findings and recommendations with the Committee to reject the grievance. He found, as did the Committee, that although common practice was for periods of service to often be of three years, there was no direction in Instruction 20/04 dictating to the Approving Authority that they are obligated to offer a service condition for a period of three years for their permanent positions. For the same reason, he found that there was no obligation to extend a three-year period of Reserve service.