# 2014-187 - Administration of Operational Allowances, Hardship Allowance, Risk Allowance (RA)

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2014–12–30

The grievor, a pilot deployed on an operation, argued that he should have been entitled to a higher level of Hardship Allowance (HA) and Risk Allowance (RA) when flying combat missions over enemy airspace. He claimed that he flew missions similar to that of other Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) pilots who were deployed to a different post, in support of the same operation, and who received an increased level of HA and RA for each day that they flew combat missions.

The Initial Authority denied the grievance stating that the grievor's operational allowances were based on his specific post, and that there was no provision in the regulations to pay him a higher rate of HA or RA for the days that he flew combat missions.

The Committee reviewed the relevant Compensation and Benefit Instructions and found that the level of both the HA and RA are determined based on an assessment of the living conditions and risks associated with a specific post, as defined in the Military Foreign Service Instruction. The Committee concluded that neither HA nor RA were designed to recognize or to take into account the danger associated with flying combat missions over enemy airspace. The grievor therefore had no entitlement to higher levels of HA and RA when flying combat missions.

The Committee recommended that the grievance be denied, but that an audit be undertaken, given the evidence that other pilots in similar circumstances had received higher rates of HA and RA than the grievor.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2015–07–07

The CDS agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation that the grievance be denied. The CDS agreed with the Committee that the administration of the existing HA and RA for aircrew that participated in OP MOBILE must be audited – there are simply too many inconsistencies. The CDS also added that the Directions issued by CJOC on HA/RA for aircrew for OP IMPACT be reviewed to ensure it is consistent with the MFSI. Since it was the 4th grievance where the CDS has been asked to consider the matter as it relates to pilots conducting offensive counterair operations, he asked CMP to lead the review in consultation with the SJS, the RCAF and the CJOC. The CDS noted that the concept that some of the forces may be projected into a higher risk area on missions may apply to other occupations. The CDS also agreed with the Committee's finding that the grievor was entitled to level 1 of HA/RA for the duration of his deployment and directed that this error be reviewed and corrected. Following the Committee's observation, the CDS took action by directing the Comd CJOC to review and amend the CDIO to meet the overall intent without contradicting the CBI.