# 2021-068 Pay and Benefits, Enrollment Offers, Pay

Case summary

F&R Date: 2022-02-17

The grievor contested the determination of his pay increment (PI) on his enrolment in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). He argued that the rate of pay he began receiving when he first reported for duty did not reflect the rate of pay set out in the Enrolment Offer that he signed. In his initial grievance submission, the grievor sought as redress, an adjustment of his rate of pay on enrolment to reflect the rate set out in the Enrolment Offer. However, following receipt of the Initial Authority (IA) disclosure, the grievor amended his requested redress to an adjustment of his PI on enrolment to General Service Officer (GSO) Captain PI 8 as it was the closest to the rate of pay set out in the Enrolment Offer.

The IA noted that the grievor enrolled as a Captain and that his PI had been determined in recognition of his prior service. The IA explained that the grievor's Enrolment Offer erroneously referenced the rate of pay of a Pilot whereas the grievor enrolled in the CAF as a GSO. The IA acknowledged that it was regrettable that an error was made on the Enrolment Offer but found that his PI had been determined correctly in accordance with article 204.015 of the Compensation and Benefits Instruction for the Canadian Forces (CBI). The IA denied the grievance. Subsequent to the IA decision, the grievor's PI was revised in recognition of additional service in acting at an equivalent rank that had been previously overlooked. However, the grievor's rate of pay on enrolment remained lower than the rate of pay reflected in the Enrolment Offer.

The Committee noted that following the revision of the grievor's rate of pay on enrolment, that the CAF had accurately recognized the grievor's prior service when determining his PI. However, the Committee noted that under CBI 204.015, additional qualifying service may be credited for any academic or special qualifications considered by the Chief of the Defence Staff to be of military value. The Committee noted that the grievor enrolled in a trade that was below its Preferred Manning Level and highlighted that although he was not a Canadian citizen, the CAF authorized his enrolment in the national interest because a special need existed. The Committee found that the use of the grievor's skills and experience to justify granting a waiver of the Canadian citizenship enrolment requirement, in the national interest, assigned a military value to his special qualifications.

The Committee also noted that, according to the grievor, he had used his own funds to retain legal counsel in attempting to rectify his situation. The Committee explained that, while the grievor had not included reimbursement of these funds in his redress sought, if he had not retained legal counsel, his PI might not have been revised in recognition of his additional service in acting rank. The Committee found that an ex gratia payment to the grievor in recognition of the grievor's expended funds and efforts would be appropriate.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority (FA) afford the grievor redress by recognizing his special qualifications of military value and granting him additional qualifying service. The Committee also recommended that the FA authorize an ex gratia payment to the grievor.

FA decision summary

The CDS, as Final Authority, agreed with the Committee that the grievor had been aggrieved and granted a higher PI on enrollment, but declined to grant an ex gratia payment on the basis that it would constitute gap-filling.