# 2014-106 - Component Transfer (CT), Pay, Promotion

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2014–10–28

The grievor argued that upon his Component Transfer (CT) from the Reserve to the Regular Force in 2006, he was not properly credited his Reserve Force service and did not receive the correct promotion dates and pay incentives (PI). Following his transfer, a review of his file determined that his promotion date to Sub-Lieutenant (SLt) needed to be changed to the date of his transfer and his pay modified to SLt PI Basic. This resulted in the grievor being paid less than his former pay as Acting Sub-Lieutenant (A/SLt) PI 2. The grievor was required to pay back the overpayment.

The Chief of Military Personnel, acting as the Initial Authority (IA), indicated that another recalculation of the grievor's qualifying service revealed that his pay upon CT should have been A/SLt PI 1. The IA also noted that this discovery of an overpayment was a new matter and, in accordance with the Crown Liabilities and Proceedings Act (CLPA), any overpayment made to the grievor six years or more prior to the date of his decision was not subject to recovery. He instructed the appropriate authorities to amend the grievor's file to reflect the new calculations of his qualifying service and pay, and to recalculate the overpayment. The IA also determined that the grievor should have been promoted to SLt once being fully qualified in his occupation and waived the time in rank for his promotion to Lt(N) to happen a few months early.

The Committee found that, in accordance with Compensation and Benefits Instructions 204.015 (2) – Qualifying Service and (3) Determination of Pay Increments on Transfer, re-enrolment or commencement of Class “C”, the recalculations completed by the IA were appropriate. As a result, the grievor's rank of A/SLt and his pay rate of PI 1 upon CT were accurate. The Committee also found that the grievor should have been promoted to SLt upon completion of the required occupation training and to Lt(N) less than two years after, given the errors and delays suffered by the grievor and that he was fulfilling a role at that rank level.

The Committee recommended that the grievance be denied. However, the Committee also recommended that the grievor's pay account be adjusted in accordance with the direction in the IA decision regarding PI levels and promotion dates.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2015–04–16

The CDS agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendations that the grievance be denied and that the grievor's pay account be adjusted in accordance with the direction in the IA decision regarding PI levels and promotion dates.