# 2014-046 - Promotion, Promotion Criteria

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2014–08–27

The grievor challenged the denial of his promotion to the rank of Major on the basis that he had been bypassed for promotion as he had not obtained the Army Operations Course (AOC) qualification before the end of the promotion year. He argued that his duties and operational tempo at that time precluded him from completing this Developmental Period 2 (DP 2) requirement and that Canadian Forces General Message (CANFORGEN) 142/06 – OPERATIONAL DEPLOYMENT, PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATION AND PROMOTION applies to his case. As redress, the grievor, sought to be promoted to the rank of Major.

The Committee had to determine whether the denial of the grievor's promotion was justified and compliant with policy.

The Initial Authority (IA) found that the grievor had not met the standard and that the decision to deny his promotion was made in accordance with the applicable policies. The IA remarked that the amount of time the grievor spent on training and operations was not uncommon. He also stated that the CANFORGEN provided for consideration of operational deployments in the selection board process, but did not provide for the waiver of a promotion criterion. The IA further opined that the grievor had not demonstrated the intention of completing his DP 2 in a timely fashion, as it appeared to him that the grievor had not requested time for professional development from his chain of command.

First, the Committee found that the grievor had not been bypassed for promotion explaining that such an argument could only be made in circumstances where all promotion criteria are met, which was not the case.

The Committee also determined that the IA had not taken into account relevant evidence and that his decision was therefore not fully informed. The Committee noted that the IA had not considered the chain of command's assessment and appreciation of the grievor's situation as it pertained to his employment and his availability to attend to his DP 2 obligations. The Committee was of the opinion that this information was relevant and determinative.

On the issue of promotion, the Committee found the grievor's situation to be a case of exception where the Chief Defence Staff's discretion found in Queen's Regulations and Orders 11.02(2) should be exercised. Based on the evidence on file, the Committee was satisfied that the grievor's operational tempo and key employments precluded him from completing his AOC prior to December 2012 and that he took the necessary steps to obtain his qualification as soon as the circumstances permitted.

The Committee recommended that the grievor be promoted to the rank of Major based on the Promotion Selection List of the applicable year.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2015–03–10

The FA agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation to promote the grievor to the rank of Major.