# 2019-043 Pay and Benefits, Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program

Case summary

F&R Date: 2020-02-05

In December 2017, the grievor was transferred to Valcartier after an overseas posting. In January 2018, he was transferred to Ottawa and in February 2018, his household goods and effects (HG&E) arrived from overseas. As a result of his transfer to Ottawa, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) stopped paying him interim meal and miscellaneous expense allowances but continued to pay them to his spouse. The grievor argued that he and his spouse were entitled to meal and miscellaneous expense allowances until the HG&E from overseas were unpacked, ie, in February 2018. He argued that the CAF should recognize his exceptional situation and reimburse him and his spouse up to the unpacking of the HG&E, doing so from the core component of the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program (CFIRP).

The Initial Authority (IA) concluded that, following the grievor's departure from Valcartier for his transfer to Ottawa, he was no longer entitled to meal and miscellaneous expense allowances. The IA also concluded that the grievor's residence at Valcartier, being equipped with a dining area, did not allow for an extension of relocation benefits.

The grievor relocated to the same residence he occupied at Valcartier prior to his overseas posting. The Committee found that, upon his arrival in December 2017, the grievor retrieved the HG&E that had been stored at Valcartier prior to his overseas posting. The recovered HG&E provided him with access to a dining area in his residence, as per the applicable provision of the CFIRP Directive. As a result, the Committee concluded that, as of December 2017, the grievor and his spouse were no longer entitled to interim meal and miscellaneous expense allowances. The Committee recommended that the grievor's relocation file be reopened and that the overpayment of the meal and miscellaneous expense allowances be recovered.

FA decision summary

The Chief of the Defence Staff disagreed with the Committee's recommendation to not grant redress measures. Like the Committee, the Chief of the Defence Staff concluded that the grievor was not eligible for meal allowances from the moment they were able to make meals in their home. However, the Chief of the Defence Staff concluded that the CFIRP directive was not clear and ordered the Chief of Military Personnel to send the grievor's file to Treasury Board with the recommendation of granting 15 additional days of allowances applicable to the grievor's partner.