# 2022-091 Careers, Initial Counselling, Remedial Measures

Case summary

F&R Date: 2023-05-26

The grievor asserted that two initial counselling (IC) remedial measures issued to the grievor were unjustified. One was issued for a performance deficiency for a breach of confidentiality as the respondent in a harassment investigation. The other IC was for a conduct deficiency for making improper comments. As redress, the grievor requested that both ICs be quashed.

The Initial Authority rejected the grievances on the grounds that they were submitted outside the time limit prescribed in article 7.06 of the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces. 

Concerning the IC issued for a performance deficiency, the Committee found that there was reliable evidence that the grievor had breached their responsibilities as a respondent under the Harassment Prevention and Resolution Instructions by soliciting statements from potential witnesses in the harassment investigation. Therefore, the Committee found that the grievor had demonstrated a conduct, not performance, deficiency in accordance with paragraph 3.3 of Defence Administrative Order and Directives (DAOD) 5019-4, Remedial Measures. 

The Committee also found that that the IC issued for a conduct deficiency was justified, as there was reliable evidence that the grievor made improper comments of a sexualized nature, contrary to the Department of National Defence and Canadian Forces Code of Values and Ethics. The Committee concluded that the issuance of an IC was an appropriate response in accordance with paragraph 3.3 of DAOD 5019-4. 

The Committee recommended that that Final Authority (FA) not afford redress. The Committee also recommended that the FA quash the performance deficiency IC for a breach of confidentiality but replace it with a conduct IC for the same deficiency.