# 2021-087 Pay and Benefits, Allowance for Loss of Operations Allowance, Repatriation

Case summary

F&R Date: 2021-11-18

The grievor claimed to be eligible for the Allowance for Loss of Operations Allowance (ALOA) following their medical repatriation to Canada. They also claimed a lack of support from the chain of command. As redress, the grievor requested all allowances and benefits they would have received had it not been for their repatriation.

The Commanding Officer of Canadian Joint Operations Command, acting as Initial Authority (IA), concluded that the grievor had not been treated in a manner that was entirely fair and in accordance with the applicable rules, regulations and policies. The IA explained that they would modify the directives for international operations, in order to clearly specify the need to determine a member's eligibility for ALOA in the event of a medical repatriation. They will also set up training for clerks prior to deployment on missions, in order to inform them of the tools available. However, the IA concluded that the grievor was not eligible for ALOA following their repatriation, because they were not convinced of the direct link between the grievor's illnesses and the conditions of their deployment.

The Committee noted that version 205.536 of the Compensation and Benefits Instructions, which was in effect when the grievor was deployed, stated that a member must be “ill as a direct result of the conditions of the deployment.” The policy did not mention “environmental conditions.”

The Committee concluded that, on a balance of probabilities, the illnesses suffered by the grievor were due to the conditions of their deployment.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority grant the grievor ALOA for the period claimed.

FA decision summary

The Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) agrees with the Committee's recommendation to grant the grievance. The CDS noted that, at the time of deployment, the applicable version of the Compensation and Benefits Instructions was less restrictive and did not define “environmental conditions.”