# 2014-042 - Incentive Pay Category (IPC), Pilot's Backdated Promotions to Captain

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2014–11–24

The grievor claims that his Pay Increment (PI) anniversary date on effective promotion to Captain (Capt) was not maintained when he attained Wings Standard and his rate of pay was changed to the Pilot pay table. He contends that this method of establishing his rate of pay is in contradiction with the decisions rendered by the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) in similar files. There is no Initial Authority decision on file.

The Committee had to determine whether the Canadian Armed Forces correctly determined the grievor's PI anniversary date at the rank of Capt in the Pilot occupation.

The Committee noted that it had reviewed several cases similar to the grievor's in the past and had determined that the PI anniversary date was the date the member was promoted to the rank of Capt. In each case, the CDS agreed and directed that their PI anniversary date at the rank of Capt be the date they were promoted to that rank, as opposed to the date they attained Wings Standard.

Subsequent to the CDS decision, CANFORGEN 209/11 was issued. However, in subsequent files the Committee found, and the CDS agreed, that the CANFORGEN had been misinterpreted and that it did not apply to pilots who had attained Wings Standard and were promoted to Capt Pilot prior to the August 2004 policy change.

In this case, the grievor was promoted to Capt in June 2001 and transferred to the Pilot pay table in January 2003. Accordingly, the Committee found that the grievor should have been granted Capt Pilot PI 1 with seven months Incentive Credit on transfer to the Pilot pay table.

The Committee recommended that the grievor be granted the pay rate of Capt Pilot PI 1 effective the date he was transferred to the Pilot pay table, with his next PI being due on the anniversary date of his promotion to Capt.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2016–01–28

The CDS agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation, and the grievance was upheld.