# 2021-175 Careers, Class C Reserve Service, Ex gratia, Procedural Fairness, Recorded Warning

Case summary

F&R Date: 2023-02-14

The grievor, a Reservist on Class “C” terms of service, was advised by his Commanding Officer (CO) that the CO had received a number of complaints made against the grievor. Shortly thereafter, the CO told the grievor that he was being returned to unit (RTU), effectively terminating his Class “C” service early, and was given a Recorded Warning (RW) based on the complaints the CO had received. The grievor denied the allegations made in the complaints. He also contended that he was not afforded procedural fairness with respect to the RTU, termination of Class “C” service and the RW. As redress, he requested that the RTU and RW be quashed. He also requested the restoration of allowances, benefits and pay for the period his Class “C” terms of service were initially set for, or the equivalent financial compensation.

The Initial Authority (IA) found that the issues identified in the RW constituted a pattern of poor conduct and found the remedial measure (RM) process described in relevant policy was followed. He also found that the RTU was justified because the grievor was given an opportunity to correct his shortcomings but failed to do so. The IA found that the termination of Class “C” service was justified based on sufficient evidence that his performance was unacceptable based on the RW and RTU. He denied the grievances.

The Committee found that, after review of the evidence in support of the RW, the instances of misconduct described in the RM were not supported by sufficiently reliable evidence. The Committee also found that the grievor was not given the time to correct his alleged deficient conduct, contrary to the applicable policy. Therefore, the Committee found that the RW was not justified.

The Committee noted that the grievor's RTU was based on the issues raised in the RW. Since the Committee found that the issues identified in the RW were not justified, the Committee found that the decision to RTU was not substantiated. In addition, the Committee noted that the termination of Class “C” service sprang from the unjustified RTU. Therefore, the Committee found that the grievor was aggrieved by the early termination of Class “C” service.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority (FA) afford redress by quashing the RW and directing that it be removed from the grievor's files. The Committee further recommended that the FA grant an ex gratia payment to the grievor as compensation for the early termination of his Class “C” service, and the unjustified treatment to which he was subjected.