# 2011-079 Careers, Class A Reserve Service, Class B Reserve Service, Termination Class B Reserve Service

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2011–09–28

The grievor was given a 30-day written notice of termination of his Class "B" service because he had been charged under the Criminal Code of Canada by a civilian Police Department a few years previously. The grievor was allowed to serve on Class "A", but was later told by his chain of command that his Class "A" service would be restricted to regular training nights and weekends. At the time he was charged, although a member of the Primary Reserve, the grievor was neither on Class "A", Class "B" nor Class "C" service. Both charges were later stayed by the Crown.

An administrative review (AR) concluded that the grievor had not breached the Canadian Forces policy relating to the matter for which he had been charged; however, he had failed to report his arrest which was contrary to Queen's Regulations and Orders article 19.56 - Report of Arrest by Civil Authority.

The grievor objected to the termination of his Class "B" service and later, to the restrictions to his Class "A" duties. The grievor stated that his dealings with the civilian Police Department occurred during his civilian days and therefore, he was not required to inform his chain of command under the Code of Service Discipline (CSD). In the matter of his Class "A" service, he suggested he had been penalized as the decision to restrict his duties was made the same week he submitted his first grievance. The grievor requested that his Class "B" service be reinstated and that the decision to limit his Class "A" duties be reversed.

The initial authority (IA) denied redress. The IA stated the grievor had an obligation to report an arrest by civilian police and he failed to do so. With regard to limiting his Class "A" duties, the IA stated there is no entitlement to a fixed number of days of Class "A" service and the grievor's Commanding Officer (CO) simply modified the grievor's work schedule until an investigation was completed.

In a synopsis prepared by staff at the Director General Canadian Forces Grievance Authority (DGCFGA), it was indicated that the grievor's circumstances did not meet the criteria for which Class "B" service can be terminated on a 30-day notice under Canadian Forces Military Personnel Instruction (CF Mil Pers Instr) 20/04 which governs the administration of Class "A", "B" and "C" Reserve service. It was concluded that the CO's decision to terminate the grievor's Class "B" service was incorrect. On the issue of Class "A" service, the synopsis indicated there is no right to Class "A" service beyond regularly scheduled parades and training and, in the circumstances, limiting the grievor's Class "A" duties was reasonable. It was recommended that the final authority partially grant redress by offering the grievor another period of Class "B" service.

The Board found that, because the grievor was not serving at the time of his arrests, the CSD did not apply; however, as a member of the Canadian Forces he had no option but to report the fact that he had been arrested. The Board also agreed with the DGCFGA synopsis that the grievor's circumstances did not satisfy the criteria for the termination of Class "B" service. In the Board's opinion, the proper course of action would have been to assign the grievor to administrative duties until the completion of the investigation. In addition, the Board noted that the grievor's service was terminated without giving him specifics or the opportunity to respond; this was unfair to the grievor and breached the rules of procedural fairness.

The Board found there was no evidence that the grievor's Class "A" service was limited because he grieved. Although the Board agreed that there is no guarantee of Class "A" service beyond regular training and parades, to deliberately curtail the grievor's Class "A" days while awaiting a decision seemed not to have been justified in the circumstances.

The Board recommended to the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) that the grievance be partially upheld.

The Board recommended to the CDS that the grievor be offered another period of Class "B" service equivalent to the period originally approved.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2011–12–20

The FA agreed with the Board's findings and recommendation to partially uphold the grievance.