# 2015-168 - Cease-Training, Level of Competency or Proficiency in English for the Pilot Occupation, Pilot, Second Official Language Competency, Training Failure
Cease-Training, Level of Competency or Proficiency in English for the Pilot Occupation, Pilot, Second Official Language Competency, Training Failure
F&R Date: 2015–12–30
The grievor contested the decision to cease his pilot training. He contented that a number of factors contributed to his difficulties and that he should be given the opportunity to resume training and continue his career pursuit as a pilot.
As an allophone, the grievor maintained that the Canadian Forces Flying Training School (CFFTS) failed to attend to his language difficulties.
In addition, the grievor argued that he was denied equal treatment in comparison to another student and that conflict with his instructor resulted in two consecutive mission failures that could have been averted with a change of instructor at an earlier opportunity.
Finally, the grievor submitted that a lack of flight and instructor continuity prevented him from developing the necessary skills required to successfully complete pilot training.
The Initial Authority (IA) found that the grievor's pilot training and course evaluations were conducted in accordance with applicable orders and regulations and that the decision to component transfer the grievor was correctly made based on all aspects of his performance and his unsuitability for pilot training.
Additionally, the IA found that the evidence on file failed to support the grievor's claim that his language difficulties were not attended to. The IA noted that not only had the Progress Review Board (PRB) found the grievor's command of the English language to be excellent but the grievor had also been provided with the opportunity to improve his radio transmission issues.
Further, the IA found the grievor's submission that he was not treated equally to another student to be without merit as the relevant circumstances differed from those of the grievor.
As a result, the IA denied the grievance, refusing the grievor's request to continue his pilot training.
The Committee found that the decision to cease the grievor's pilot training was not based on his alleged language difficulties.The Committee noted that Canada has two official languages (OL), English and French. Upon review of the information on file, the Committee found that the grievor had chosen English as his first official language (FOL) and that it was reasonable to conclude that English was the most appropriate choice. Therefore, the Committee found that the grievor's right to receive training in the OL of his choice was respected and the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) fulfilled its obligation in that regard. Furthermore, the Committee found that the CAF had no obligation to train allophone members in their FOL.
The Committee found that although the grievor may not have felt comfortable with his instructor or his teaching style, it did not amount to conflict and was not a significant factor in his pilot training difficulties.
The Committee found that the grievor's training fell within acceptable levels for flying continuity and on the issue of instructor continuity, the grievor's personal path had dictated some of his changes while others were necessary to respect the established standard.
The Committee found that the grievor was well aware of his training difficulties and had articulated them to the Progress Review Board as being struggles with stress management and a lack of confidence. The Committee found that, due to these stated difficulties, the grievor was unable to meet the course standard within allocated time and resources and his pilot training was justifiably ceased in accordance with policy.
Accordingly, the Committee recommended that the grievance be denied.
FA Decision Summary
The FA agreed with the Committee findings and recommendation to deny the grievance. The FA did not agree with the Committee's systemic recommendation to direct the imposition of a level of competency or proficiency in English upon entry for the Pilot occupation. He notes that no statistics are kept on the rate of failure for allophone members, and that the aviation technical terminology is new to all student pilots. Nevertheless, the FA forwarded a copy of the Committee's related observations to the Commander Military Personnel Generation Command.
Report a problem or mistake on this page
- Date modified: