# 2020-112 Careers, Course failure

Case summary

F&R Date: 2021-09-22

The grievor argued that the decision to end his training was not justified because his performance check (PC) re-test merited a passing grade. He further maintained that the course instructors assessed him unfairly and that the PC criteria were not provided in advance. As redress, the grievor requested a passing grade on the PC.

The Initial Authority (IA), the Commander of Canadian Forces Intelligence Group, disagreed and found that the grievor's PC failure was due to a lack of knowledge. The IA explained that the criteria were defined and that the grievor had many opportunities to seek assistance. The IA also explained that while the re-test deviated from the norm due to limited time and resources, there was no deliberate attempt to fail the grievor.

The Committee noted that the PC marking criteria stipulates that failing two critical tasks in the PC results in failing the PC. The Committee found that the grievor failed the PC precisely because he failed two critical tasks on the re-test. The Committee found that the re-test process was fair given the training staff gave him every chance to succeed by re-assessing him on only two of his failed critical tasks. The Committee noted that all members of the grievor's Progress Review Board consistently concluded that the grievor lacked fundamental knowledge during the course. Although uncontested, the Committee found that the decision to end his training was justified.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority deny redress.