# 2011-135 Pay and Benefits, Allowances and Benefits, Special operations allowance

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2012–01–30

The grievor was posted to a unit where certain, but not all, positions had been designated for the purpose of an entitlement to an environmental allowance. The grievor’s position was not one so designated but he argued that he met all the criteria required for the allowance, held unique qualifications, and was fully trained and qualified in the tasks expected of those members in the designated positions. The grievor contended that it was unfair and inequitable that he was not being paid the allowance. As redress, the grievor requested that his position be designated for the purpose of receiving the environmental allowance, and that the designation be backdated.

The Board found that:

• the eligibility to receive the allowance required one to be in a designated unit or in a designated position, no matter how well qualified one might be;
• the grievor was not eligible because he was not posted to a designated unit or position;
• the grievor was not being employed by the unit in the same manner as those members in designated positions; and
• the designation of positions, whether individually or by entire units, is not something to be done in response to requests from individual unit members, but rather must be the result of Canadian Forces requirements; therefore, it would not be appropriate for the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) to exercise his authority to designate the grievor’s position solely at his request.

The Board recommended that the grievance be denied.

The Board observed that the issue of designating the grievor’s unit for the purpose of receiving the allowance had been ongoing for too long and suggested that the CDS make the review of this particular matter be a top priority.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2013–03–04

The CDS agreed with the Board's findings and recommendation that the grievance be denied.