# 2017-133 - Subsidized Education Repayment

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2018–02–28

The grievor took part in a practicum overseas through a mandatory course for his subsidized university education. He determined that he had been aggrieved in the administration of his requests for authorization and his expense claims for the trip. He also felt that his Subsidized Education Manager (SEM) made derogatory comments about him in the expense claim audit report. The grievor requested that all the expenses incurred during his practicum be reimbursed to him, that the expense claim audit report be removed from his record and that his SEM apologize for the statements made about him.

The Initial Authority (IA), the Director General – Compensation and Benefits, recognized that the grievor was entitled to reimbursement for the various travel costs related to his practicum. The IA also recognized that certain comments made in the expense claim audit report were superfluous, but found that he did not have the necessary authority to remove this document from the grievor`s personal file. Lastly, the IA pointed out that the request requiring an apology from the SEM was not a practice that was encouraged or normally accepted and added that, in any case, he did not have the necessary authority to grant that request.

The Committee did not address the reimbursement of travel costs, as the grievor was satisfied with the decision of the IA that all costs be reimbursed. However, the Committee concluded that the grievor's request was not effectively administered under the guidelines of the Student Guide for Students Subsidized at Civilian Academic Institutions. In addition, the Committee concluded that the internal audit document for travel claims contained unjustified and biased comments. Consequently, the Committee recommended that the Chief of the Defence Staff order the grievor's claim audit document be removed from his records and disposed of subject to the Library and Archives of Canada Act.

FA Decision Summary

FA Decision Pending