# 2013-005 Pay and Benefits, Door-to-Door Move, Integrated Relocation Program (CF IRP), Relocation Benefits

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2013–04–29

While preparing to relocate his household goods and effects (HG&E) to Europe, the grievor was informed that under the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program (CF IRP) he needed to plan for a door-to-door move in order to receive all associated benefits. It was not until his HG&E were packed and loaded that the grievor was informed of the date his HG&E would arrive at destination. Given the expected date of arrival, the grievor was authorized to postpone his Change of Strength date and his travel to new location date. He further opted to go on leave in Canada while his HG&E were on route to Europe. However, the grievor's HG&E arrived at destination two weeks earlier than forecasted. When informed of this early arrival, the grievor modified his flight and arrived before the original scheduled date but eight days after his HG&E. The grievor submitted a grievance since he was denied reimbursement from the Core component of the CF IRP of the interim lodgings, meals and miscellaneous (ILM&M) expenses incurred from the date of arrival of his HG&E, on the basis that he was not at destination to receive them.

The Director General Compensation and Benefits, the Initial Authority, denied the grievance asserting that in accordance with the CF IRP, it was the grievor's responsibility to be at destination when his HG&E arrived so as to achieve a door-to-door move.

The Board first looked at Section 2.2 of the CF IRP that provides Canadian Forces members are responsible for ensuring a door-to-door move by coordinating six criteria which are: the disposal of accommodation; the acquisition of accommodation; the occupancy date of new accommodation; the report for duty date; the shipment of HG&E; and the travel to new location. Moreover, the CF IRP states that ILM&M benefits would no longer be reimbursable once the HG&E were available for delivery at the new place of duty unless the circumstances were beyond the member's control.

The Board analyzed the grievor's relocation plan and found that he had produced an effective and well-coordinated plan for a door-to-door move as required by Section 2.2 of the CF IRP 2009. The Board considered the early arrival of the grievor's HG&E and found that the ship's schedule and itinerary were simply not within his control. The Board noted that the grievor was denied access to tracking information for the shipment of his HG&E, and that he was only advised by the gaining unit once the shipment had arrived at destination, making it impossible for him to readjust his plan. The Board concluded that the grievor mitigated the circumstances immediately upon being informed and that he was diligent. The Board recommended that the eight days of additional ILM&M should be reimbursed from the Core component of the CF IRP.

The Board recommended that the Chief of the Defence Staff uphold the grievance.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2014–01–17

The Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) did not agree with the Committee's recommendation that the grievance be upheld. The CDS agreed that the grievor's HG&E arrived early at his post outside Canada and that this was beyond the grievor's control. However, he found that for moves outside Canada, the only way a member may be reimbursed for ILM&M from core funding, beyond 30 days, is if the Department or its contracted agent have caused a delay in the delivery of HG&E. The CDS found that the grievor received 29 days of ILM&M, along with an additional two travel days and one unpack/unload day, for a total of 32 days of ILM&M from core funding. The CDS found that the grievor could not be reimbursed for further ILM&M from core funding since the additional days of ILM&M required were not caused by the department, but by the grievor's date of arrival at his post. The CDS was satisfied that the grievor was relocated in a manner that was efficient and cost effective, while having a minimum detrimental effect on the grievor and the grievor's family, but noted that the current ILM&M policy was in the midst of being revised in conjunction with the Treasury Board.