# 2014-198 - Integrated Relocation Program (CF IRP), Relocation Benefits

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2015–01–19

The grievor contested the application of the “capital improvements” portion of the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program (CF IRP) directive and argued that its all-inclusive list of eligible capital improvements was inconsistent with Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) policy. The grievor alleged that other federal agencies applied different standards to their relocation benefits and that Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members were consequently being treated unfairly. The grievor also sought to submit a business case after his relocation in order to maximize his benefits.

The Initial Authority (IA), the Director General Compensation and Benefits, concluded that the CRA policies did not supersede the CF IRP and that the majority of the grievor's claims did not fall within the all-inclusive list of eligible capital improvements within the CF IRP and could therefore not be reimbursed. The IA also found that the CF IRP specifically disallows the submission of business cases to alter benefits. The IA denied the grievance.

The Committee reviewed the statutory and regulatory framework that underpin the CF IRP directive and found that its creation was a valid exercise of delegated power by Treasury Board and that it was exhaustive of all reimbursements to which the grievor was entitled.

The Committee found that CRA policy was not in conflict with the CF IRP Directive; rather, both are authoritative within their own realm. The grievor was entitled to certain benefits under the CF IRP directive and maintained the ability to claim tax deductions under the CRA Policy.

The Committee recognized that other departmental relocation policies are not relevant to the application of the CF IRP directive. Further, the Committee found that the alternative policy cited by the grievor provided precisely the same benefits as the CF IRP directive.

Finally, the Committee agreed with the IA that the CF IRP directive clearly forbids the submission of a business case to alter any benefits provided.

The Committee recommended that the Chief of the Defence Staff deny the grievance.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2015–08–18

The CDS agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation that the grievance be denied.