# 2019-203 Releases, Release - Medical, Universality of Service Principle
Release - Medical, Universality of Service Principle
Case summary
F&R Date: 2020-03-31
The grievor argued that, based on advice from medical authorities and his chain of command, he expected to be medically released from the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and therefore began proactively preparing for his future, including making consequential career and financial commitments. However, due to an unpublished shift in CAF policy interpretation, he was found to be fit for continued service. He contended that his plans relied heavily on the benefits associated with a medical release and requested that he be granted these benefits even though he had not been medically released.
The Initial Authority (IA) noted that a review of Medical Employment Limitations (MEL) vis-à-vis continued service was conducted in 2017 with an aim of increasing retention rates. A review of the grievor's MEL determined that he was fit for continued service. The IA found that there was never a decision made to medically release the grievor, and since he was not medically released, he is not entitled to benefits associated with a medical release.
The Committee found that CAF medical authorities have overstepped their authority in counselling the grievor and leading him to believe that a medical release was a foregone conclusion as medical authorities have no role to play in the decision-making process concerning releases from the CAF. Nonetheless, the Committee found that, as the grievor had not been released medically or otherwise from the CAF but continued to serve, he had no entitlement to receive the benefits associated with a medical release. Consequently, the Committee recommended that the Final Authority not afford the grievor redress.
FA decision summary
The grievor withdrew the grievance.
Page details
- Date modified: