# 2014-036 - Depart with Dignity (DWD), Joint Personnel Support Unit (JPSU), Vocational Rehabilitation Program

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2014–05–30

The grievor argued that prior to being medically released from the Canadian Armed Forces, his posting to the Joint Personnel Support Unit (JPSU), his Depart with Dignity (DWD) and his vocational rehabilitation program were mishandled by his Unit. As a redress, the grievor requested that the individuals responsible for the mishandling of his file apologize to him and that a lecture be given to all senior non-commissioned officers on the importance of DWD.

The grievor's Commanding Officer (CO), acting as the Initial Authority (IA), and his successor, acknowledged that the grievor's file was not staffed correctly, which resulted in delays in the initiation of his vocational rehabilitation program and, contrary to policy, to the non-respect of the grievor's wishes with regard to his DWD. The IA assumed responsibility for these errors and offered to apologize to the grievor. The IA also directed that senior staff provide an annual briefing to the Unit concerning the importance of DWD. The grievor did not consider that the IA decision afforded the warranted redress in the circumstances.

The Committee had to determine whether the grievor's chain of command mishandled his posting to the JPSU, his DWD and his vocational rehabilitation.

The Committee found that although the file revealed that two different CO accepted responsibility for the errors, offered to apologize to the grievor, confirmed that the individuals responsible for the mishandling of his file were counseled, and that the annual DWD lecture had been given to all personnel, no action proved to be satisfactory to the grievor. Upon review, the Committee concluded that the grievor's chain of command had taken appropriate, reasonable and commensurate action to resolve the grievance and to avoid that a similar situation reoccurs in the future. While it acknowledged that the grievor did not consider these measures to be appropriate, the Committee was of the view that it remained the prerogative and responsibility of the chain of command to determine and impose what is considered to be the appropriate measures to resolve a given situation or remedy a particular injustice.

However, the Committee suggested to the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) that he acknowledge the grievor's perseverance and tenacity and recognize his direct contribution to a positive and systemic change in his former Unit.

The Committee recommended that the CDS deny the grievance.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2015–01–22

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