# 2020-073 Pay and Benefits, Education allowance, Military Foreign Service Instruction

Case summary

F&R Date: 2020-08-20

This is a group of six grievances where Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members posted outside of Canada (OUTCAN) were negatively affected by changes to Foreign Services Directive (FSD) 34.6. Prior to 1 April 2019, CAF members posted OUTCAN were entitled to receive postsecondary shelter assistance for dependants who were attending postsecondary institutions anywhere in Canada. However, on 1 April 2019, the FSD was changed to state that CAF members could receive postsecondary shelter assistance for dependants only if they attended postsecondary institutions located at the CAF member's last place of duty in Canada.

The Committee found that the new FSD applied to CAF members as of 1 April 2019, and the grievors were therefore not entitled to postsecondary shelter assistance, as their dependants were attending educational institutions not at the members' former place of duty.

Although the grievors had not been aggrieved by a decision, act, or omission in the affairs of the CAF, the Committee found that the grievors had been unfairly treated in the manner in which the change to the FSD had been implemented by the Treasury Board (TB) of Canada. There was no advance notice of the impending changes to the FSD and the grievors' dependants had already applied and been accepted at postsecondary institutions before the policy changed was announced. Financial commitments had been made by the grievors and their families based on existing policies and suddenly they no longer qualified to receive postsecondary shelter assistance.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority (FA) not afford the grievors redress but that a submission be sent to the TB on behalf of the affected members, requesting a one-year exception to the new FSD 34.6.

FA decision summary

The FA, the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS), agreed that the grievor was not aggrieved in the conduct of the affairs of the CAF and that the CDS cannot grant any remedy. The FA noted that, in accordance with his guidance, Director Compensation Benefits Administration had submitted a request for review to TB in June 2021, stating that the CAF had not been represented in the discussions and that the changes were ill-suited to the reality of members, and asking that an exception be considered. TB denied the request, responding that the Department of National Defence had been involved in the discussions. The FA concluded that, although the grievor had been treated in accordance with the applicable policy, she had been treated unfairly in the implementation of the change and expressed disappointment with the manner in which the events had unfolded and with the poor communication.