# 2021-325 Pay and Benefits, Post Living Differential

Case summary

F&R Date: 2022-11-28

The grievor was denied retroactive Post Living Differential (PLD) benefits for the period when he was unauthorized to move his household goods and effects (HG&E) from his dwelling to his place of enrolment. He argued that his circumstances met the eligibility conditions set out in Compensation and Benefits Instructions for the Canadian Forces (CBI) 205.45 and those communicated by a policy analyst for the Director Pay Policy and Development.

The Initial Authority, the Director General Compensation and Benefits, refused to accept the grievance on the grounds that it was submitted outside the time limit prescribed in Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces, article 7.06.

CBI 205.45 defines a principal residence as a dwelling occupied by the member or their dependants, situated at the place where the member's HG&E were located on enrolment, if that place is a place of duty from which they have not been authorized to move the HG&E at public expense. The Committee found that the grievor was not posted to, nor did he perform his normal military duties, at his place of enrolment and, therefore, his dwelling was not located at a place of duty. The Committee then concluded that the grievor did not have a principal residence in a PLD area during the period relevant to his grievance as required by CBI 205.45.

As the grievor's circumstances did not meet the purpose and criteria for eligibility for PLD set out in applicable policy, the Committee found that he was not entitled to the PLD benefit for the period in question and recommended that the Final Authority not afford redress.

FA decision summary

The Chief of the Defence Staff agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation not to afford the grievor redress.