# 2014-200 - Career Progression, Promotion

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2015–08–14

The grievor claimed that he had foregone civilian employment to enrol in the CAF, under the Airborne Electronic Sensor Operator (AES Op) Direct Entry Trial (DET), after receiving assurances from the Canadian Forces Recruiting Center (CFRC) of better opportunity for pay and faster career progression in his occupation. He reports having later learned, upon promulgation of Canadian Forces General Message (CANFORGEN) 177/13 issued in 2013, that the career progression pattern for the AES Op, found at Table 3 to Annex A of Canadian Forces Administrative Order (CFAO) 49-4, was changed in 2009 to the normal CAF career progression pattern, found at Table 1, and applied to all AES Op candidates regardless of the enrolment source. The grievor argued that until they were amended by CANFORGEN 177/13 the provisions of Table 3 remained in effect and should have applied to his career progression. The grievor was seeking retroactive promotion to the rank of Master Corporal.

The Initial Authority (IA) denied the grievance. The IA explained that prior to the DET, AES Op candidates were recruited from internal sources only and promoted in accordance with Table 3. As the entry standards into the occupation were changed to permit the DET, the normal CAF career progression pattern at Table 1 was applied to candidates enrolled under the DET. The IA also specified that CANFORGEN 177/13 was published to announce the conclusion of the DET and the approval of permanent changes to the occupation's intake plan.

The Committee found that the DET Implementation Plan was approved by the appropriate authorities and was the authoritative document governing the career progression of candidates who enrolled under the DET. As such, the grievor's promotions had been administered accordingly. The Committee also found that Table 3 remained in effect only for those who had enrolled prior to the DET, as CANFORGEN 177/13 served to make permanent change to Annex A of CFAO 49-4 after this trial had been completed and the CAF had decided to make permanent changes to the occupation's intake strategy, and consequently to Annex A to CFAO 49-4. Finally, the Committee determined that the evidence provided by the grievor did not meet the test for negligent representation.

The Committee recommended that the grievance be denied.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2015–10–29

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