# 2011-070 Careers, Medical Condition, Medical Employment Limitation (MEL)

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2011–09–26

The grievance relates to two medical employment limitations (MELs) assigned to the grievor by the Director Medical Policy (D Med Pol) in relation to his Military Occupation Structure Identification (MOSID) Task Statement (TS). The Director Military Careers Administration initiated an administrative review which concluded that the grievor was in breach of Universality of Service (U of S) and that he could be accommodated for a temporary period.

The grievor was objecting to two MELs which referred to his MOSID TS. He argued that one of the MELs was inflammatory, that it questioned his mental competency, and that it failed to reflect that he had successfully completed training and functioned well during his period of accommodation. The grievor also argued that the second MEL was ambiguous and bore no relevance to his employment. In his view, the MELs were damaging towards his current employment and any future employment outside the Canadian Forces.

The initial authority (IA) offered a slight modification to one of the MELs but otherwise denied the grievance. The grievor requested final authority (FA) adjudication, seeking to have both MELs entirely removed.

The Canadian Forces Publication 154 (Medical Standards) is “intended to assist medical personnel in the review and evaluation of medical conditions and the assignment of specific employment limitations”. It was undisputed that the grievor was in breach of U of S and was to be medically released. Therefore, the Board examined whether the disputed MELs were necessary in the grievor’s case.

The subject matter expert (SME) on the issue, the Head of Medical Policy and Standards at the CF Health Services Group explained that the career authority and the chain of command need to know what a member can and cannot be required to do given his medical condition. The SME added that the MELs must be written as closely as possible to the MOSID TS in order to minimize the risk of inconsistent and inaccurate interpretation and to make it easier to analyse a member’s fitness against the TS. More specifically, this was done to provide to both the member and the approving authority (AA) the most precise picture of the situation in order to help the AA make an appropriate decision.

Given that the grievor’s medical condition was permanent and that the MELs indicated certain limitations to his possible employment, the Board found that it was appropriate and in accordance with policy for D Med Pol to incorporate the wording of the MOSID TS in the grievor’s MELs.

Considering the nature of the specific medical issue and the grievor’s responsibilities, the Board found that the MELs were required and reasonable and that they could not be safely eliminated. However, the Board agreed with the IA’s suggestion that the wording of one of the MELs should be modified.

Concerning the grievor's apprehension that his MOSID TS MELs would limit or be prejudicial to his future civilian career, the Board indicated that a civilian employer would not be made aware of the content of the grievor’s medical file unless the grievor agreed to provide such information.

Other than agreeing with the IA that the wording of one of the MELs should be modified, the Board recommended to the FA that the grievance be denied.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2011–12–20

The FA agreed with the findings of the Board and its recommendation to deny the grievance.