# 2012-101 Careers, Class B Reserve Service, Reserve Force, Respect of Procedures/Policies, Selection Board

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2012–10–10

The grievor replied to an advertisement for a Class B position which indicated that the component order of preference for the applicants would be: 1) members of the Primary Reserve (Air) (P Res (Air)), and 2) members of other P Res elements. The grievor, an Air reservist who held a position within the Maritime Command Primary Reserve List (PRL) at the time was identified as a "priority 2" candidate and was not considered, but screened out in favour of a "priority 1" applicant.

The grievor argued that as a member of the P Res who wears a blue uniform, she is an Air reservist even if employed outside of the Air Command and her application should have been treated as such. She requested that the original selection process be set aside and that a new Selection Board be formed to review the files of all original applicants. She also requested to be considered as a "priority 1" candidate.

The initial authority (IA) determined that at the time of application, the grievor was a member of the P Res, but affiliated to a component of the Naval Reserve and not the Air Reserve; however, despite this fact, the IA found an irregularity in the selection process given that the grievor's application had been accepted, but never considered/reviewed by the Selection Board. The IA directed that the initial Selection Board be reconvened to review and assess the grievor's application.

The grievor submitted that the IA had not addressed all of her contentions as he had determined that she was not an Air reservist, but failed to indicate what type of reservist she was. She argued that her application should have been reviewed as an Air reservist, albeit employed with another command at the time of the selection process. In her view, for her application to be reviewed was a futile exercise if her file was still considered on a "priority 2" basis.

After a thorough review of the applicable Reserve Force policies, the Board agreed substantially with the IA's conclusion that, at the time of the advertised position, the grievor was not a member of the Air Reserve. In the Board's opinion, the grievor was not affiliated with a unit, headquarters (HQ) or PRL of the Air Reserve notwithstanding the colour of the uniform worn. The Board noted section 12 of Canadian Forces Administrative Order 2-8 - Reserve Force - Organization, Command and Obligation to Serve, which specifies that there are five authorized PRL establishments against which members of the P Res may be carried. Four of the PRLs form part of the four elements and are commanded and controlled by the appropriate command HQ. At the time, the grievor was not commanded by the Air Command.

The Board also found that it was open to Air Command to prioritize applicants on the basis of component affiliations as this practice is entirely permissible; however, as the IA conceded, the Board agreed that what is unfortunate with such a process is that well-qualified candidates may have been screened out simply because there was a "priority 1" applicant.

While the Board noted that part of the grievance has been rightfully granted in that the grievor's application is being considered, the Board found the grievor should not be categorized as a "priority 1" candidate.

The Board recommended that the Chief of the Defence Staff deny the grievance as it pertains to the classification criteria since the Board concluded that the grievor was not a member of the P Res (Air) at the time of the selection process.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2013–04–04

The CDS agreed with the Board's finding and recommendation that the grievance be denied. The CDS agreed that the policy that permits component prioritization for Primary Reserve employment is unnecessarily restrictive and disavantages Primary Reserve members who may have extensive experience within an element from competing for a position. The CDS directed the Chief- Reserves and Cadets to review the practice of restricting competitions to determine whether it is widely used and if so, whether it is indeed a reasonable force generation practice. He also directed a concurrent review of the issue of environmental affiliation as it pertains to reservists employed outside the element of their DEU.