# 2013-046 Careers, Counselling and Probation (C&P), Family Violence, Promotion, Remedial Measures

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2013–08–30

The grievor disagreed with a period of Counselling and Probation (C & P) that was imposed on him for family violence, believing that it would have a long term negative effect on his career and that it had already caused his promotion to be deferred and his removal from a career course. The remedial measures form stated that the grievor had uttered threats on three separate occasions the last being against his spouse. The grievor argued that it was unfair to combine the three unrelated incidents and then suggest that they formed a pattern of family violence. Further, he stated that he was only convicted on one occasion, some two years earlier, and that the issue that had caused his recent arrest was a complete fabrication by his spouse and the charges had been dismissed in favour of a peace bond. Finally, the grievor complained that there was a bias in his workplace created by his spouse (also a Canadian Forces member).

The Initial Authority (IA) refuted the grievor's claim that there was no evidence of family violence, pointing to the grievor's arrest by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for uttering threats to his spouse. He further indicated that the family violence policy did not require that a trend be established, and that the previous incidents were cited only to show a pattern of violent behaviour. Finally, the IA stated that he did not believe that the C&P would have a lasting effect on the grievor's career and denied the grievance.

The Committee sought additional information from the grievor's Career Manager, the Court Attending Officer, the Unit Chief Warrant Officer and the grievor in order to confirm the facts surrounding the grievor's court appearance, his deferred promotion, the delayed career course and all available details regarding the three alleged incidents of violence.

The Committee found it troubling that the IA appeared to rely on the grievor's arrest as proof that there was a conduct deficiency, rather than the outcome of the criminal proceedings. The Committee also noted the lack of a proper fact finding exercise by the Commanding Officer prior to issuing the remedial measure. The Committee could not find any evidence to support the allegation that the grievor did in fact utter threats to his spouse. Furthermore, in the second incident mentioned by the C&P, the grievor was arrested but never charged as the other party was apparently convicted and sentenced to 17 days imprisonment. The grievor admitted the third incident but pointed out that it had occurred more than two years earlier. The Committee found that C&P for that one incident may have been justified at the time it occurred but that it was no longer appropriate so long after the fact. The Committee did agree with the IA that there was no evidence of any bias against the grievor in the workplace. Finally, the Committee recommended that the grievance be upheld, that the C&P imposed on the grievor be removed from his file, and that the grievor's promotion be backdated to the original promotion date.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2014–05–12

The FA agreed with the Committee's recommendation that the grievance be upheld. The FA partially agreed with the Committee's finding that there was no reliable evidence as to whether an incident of domestic violence had occurred. The FA was of the view that a conviction for uttering threats is not necessary before administrative actions are initiated. However, the FA concluded that the C&P for family violence was unreasonable because one incident was entirely unrelated and there was no evidence that there were uttered threats against the spouse. The FA agreed with the Committee's recommendation that the C&P and all related documents be removed from the grievor's file. The FA added that, in the circumstances, considering that the grievor completed successfully the anger management counselling, further administrative action at this time would not yield any positive benefit for anyone involved and would not be in the interests of natural justice. Finally, the FA agreed with the Committee's recommendation that the grievor,s promotion be backdated to the original promotion date.