# 2014-014 - Component Transfer (CT), Occupational Transfer (OT)

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2014–05–23

The grievor, a Lieutenant-Commander (LCdr) in the Reserve Force (Res F), requested and was authorized a component transfer (CT) to the Regular Force (Reg F) into a new military occupation. Despite being initially authorized to keep her rank, she later had to relinquish it and revert to Lieutenant (Navy) (Lt(N)) because she was untrained in her new occupation. Her date to enter the promotion zone (EPZ) was also modified from the initial offer. The grievor was not immediately notified of the change in rank and EPZ, but only once her service in the Reg F had begun. It was the grievor's view that her qualifications and experience should have allowed her to remain LCdr as detailed in the initial offer. The issue before the Committee was whether the grievor received the correct rank and EPZ when she transferred from the Res F to the Reg F.

The Initial Authority (IA), the Director General Military Careers, denied the grievance. He acknowledged that the grievor should have been contacted before her rank was amended and provided with an explanation, allowing her the opportunity to re-visit her decision with regard to the CT. The IA apologized for this oversight. He explained that the CT policy does not provide for rank protection in the grievor's case because she was not transferring into the same occupation and therefore, had not reached the occupation functional point. He also noted that all of the grievor's qualifications and experience were taken into consideration and as a result she received the maximum rank permissible in accordance with policy.

From the review of Canadian Forces Military Personnel Instruction 03/08 (hereinafter “the instruction”), the Committee found that this policy provides for a prior learning assessment and recognition (PLAR) and a review of previous experience (RPE) to be conducted as part of a CT. In the grievor's case, the conduct of a PLAR and RPE established that the grievor was entitled to the rank of Lt(N), not that of LCdr. The results were however never communicated to the grievor. The instruction also states that members who transfer from the Res F to the Reg F shall be rank protected only if they have met the occupation functional point for their occupation. Given that the grievor transferred into a new occupation, she did not meet this criterion. Therefore, her rank was protected at the uncontrolled rank level only, that being Lt(N). The Committee also found that the grievor would enter the promotion zone four years after her promotion to Lt(N), which was correctly established.

The Committee recommended to the Chief of the Defence Staff that he deny the grievance.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2014–12–02

The FA agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation that the grievance be denied.