# 2018-114 Pay and Benefits, Education allowance

Education allowance

Case summary

F&R Date: 2019-03-28

The grievor argued that he should have been reimbursed for the tutoring fees incurred for his dependant child while on a foreign posting, as he believed he met all the conditions of Foreign Service Directive (FSD) 34, Education Allowance.

The Initial Authority denied the grievor's request stating that there was no indication that the grievor's child would not be able to re-enter the Canadian public school system despite her academic results while outside of Canada, that the tutoring was not a necessity and that the child’s difficulties likely arose from a change in school format rather than a change of curriculum.

The Committee found that the grievor's situation met both the first and second criteria to be entitled to an education allowance under FSD 34, finding that his child demonstrated academic deficiencies and that a competent authority had recommended tutoring. However, the Committee found that the child’s difficulties were most likely due to a lack of affinity in a subject and was unable to find that the academic difficulties were attributable to foreign service, the third criteria for education allowance.

The Committee determined that grievor was treated fairly and should not be reimbursed for the tutoring expenses he incurred for his dependant child while serving on a foreign posting.

FA decision summary

The Director Canadian Forces Grievance Authority, the Final Authority (FA) in this case, determined that the grievor had been treated fairly and in accordance with the applicable policies. The FA did not grant the grievor's request, pursuant to Foreign Service Directive (FSD) 34, for reimbursement of a tutoring education expense for his dependant.

The FA agreed with the Committee that the grievor's dependant experienced an academic deficiency during the first year of foreign service and that a competent educational authority had recommended tutoring.

The FA also agreed with the Committee that the academic deficiency at issue was not attributable to foreign service. The FA determined that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the curriculum at the post was harder than the Ontario curriculum and noted that the dependant's attendance at a private school prior to the posting and transition to a public school at the post had been a personal choice.

The FA additionally took the view that given the link to foreign service, the intent of the policy under FSD 34 was to provide tutoring during the first year at the new school. The FA noted that the grievor did not seek tutoring for his dependant until after the first school year.

Page details

Date modified: