# 2011-120 Pay and Benefits, Pay
Case Summary
F&R Date: 2012–02–20
The grievor component transferred to the Regular Force as a Direct Entry Officer (DEO) under the Military Medical Training Plan (MMTP) Special Initiative as an Acting sub-Lieutenant (A/SLt). Until completion of the required training for medical officers, in this case six years, the grievor remained under his former military occupation (MOC). His enrolment, transfer, posting instruction message indicated he would receive pay increment (PI) 2 upon transfer and he would be paid in accordance with Compensation and Benefits Instructions (CBI) article 204.211, table B. The grievor received a PI increase one year after his transfer, but did not receive one the following year. Following some inquiries, the grievor was informed that he was neither entitled to a rank increase while he attended medical training nor was he entitled to more than one PI increase during the same timeframe.
The grievor submitted a grievance contending that CBI article 204.211 was inequitable in relation to his situation and was not written in keeping with the spirit of remuneration within the Canadian Forces (CF). He argued that his pay should have been administered in accordance with CBI paragraph 204.211(12) - Completion of training, as opposed to paragraph 204.211(11) - Limitations on pay increments. The grievor stated that CBI paragraph 204.211(12) applies to those members whose training is delayed due to service requirements and therefore should apply to him since his training had been delayed as a result of accepting the MMTP offer. He requested that the latter paragraph be applied to him and that he be granted two additional PIs. As well, the grievor later pointed out that he had never been given the opportunity to be promoted, in contrast to his fellow officers in the medical officer training plan who are promoted to the next rank after four years of medical school.
The initial authority (IA) denied redress. The IA indicated there was no evidence that the scheduling of the grievor's training in his MOC was changed or delayed by the CF.
The Board noted that CBI paragraph 204.211(11) imposes a limitation on PI increases; in the case of a A/SLt, only one increase can be granted. The Board also noted that CBI paragraph 204.211(12) affords the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) the discretion to grant up to two additional PIs; it was pointed out however, that this discretion is limited to situations where a CF member cannot complete training in his current MOC due to military reasons. The Board indicated that the grievor was still being administered as if he were in his former MOC although he was, for all intent and purposes, studying and training to become a licensed doctor; therefore, the Board found it reasonable and logical that the CF would not simultaneously train the grievor in his former occupation. In the Board's opinion, the occupational training requirements in the grievor's previous MOC did not change and there was no delay caused by the CF in the delivery of that training. The Board concluded that the CDS was prohibited from exercising his discretion in this case.
In the matter of promotion, the Board noted that Canadian Forces Administrative Order 11-6 -Commissioning and Promotion Policy - Officers - Regular Force, applied to the grievor's situation; specifically, sub-paragraph 30(c) clearly states that an officer governed by the MMTP is not eligible for promotion while undergoing training. The Board found the grievor could not be promoted until completion of his medical training.
The Board recommended to the CDS that the grievance be denied.
CDS Decision Summary
CDS Decision Date: 2012–08–15
The CDS did not agree with the Board's recommendation that the grievance be denied.
The CDS agreed with the Board's finding that the grievor's training was not delayed due to the CF's inability to schedule training and consequently, he cannot grant additional PIs under CBI 204.211(12) as requested by the grievor. However, the CDS reviewed the MOTP, the MMTP and the MMTP-SI and he was of the view that the policies under which these plans are managed are out of sync and need to be harmonized. For example, although MMTP provides a higher starting rate of pay due to their members former rank and PIs, they are restricted to one PI under CBI 204.211(11) and are further penalized by being ineligible for promotion for the entire duration of their medical training due to the wording of CFAO 9-62.
The CDS also wrote that CFAO 11-6, which states that officers under the MMTP are ineligible for promotion until cessation of training, is out of date and must reflect the evolving needs of the CF as evidenced by the manner in which officers undergoing MOTP and MMTP are treated. The CDS directed CMP to initiate a review of CFAO 9-62, 9-63 and 11-6 and, in the interim, to issue instructions to ensure that MMTP officers in the ranks of 2Lt and Lt are treated in the same manner as MOTP officers. Until the limitations of CBI 204.211(11) is reviewed in order to support CF initiatives such as MMTP, the CDS used CBI 204.015(7) to grant additional PIs in recognition of the achievements of MMTP officers, such as the grievor.
Page details
- Date modified: