# 2022-284 Careers, COVID-19

Case summary

F&R Date: 2024-06-21

The grievor was given remedial measures and released from the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), as he had not complied with the CAF COVID-19 vaccination policy. The grievor challenged the decision to release him from the CAF because of his refusal to be vaccinated and his refusal to disclose his vaccination status, and considers that the administrative measures taken against him are excessive considering the state of the situation. 

The initial authority did not rule on this case, since the grievance concerned a decision, act or omission by the Chief of the Defence Staff. 

The Committee found that the CAF had not demonstrated that the public interest justified the overbroad and disproportionate application of the CAF's COVID-19 vaccination policy, in a context where military vaccination rates were high and the CAF had not taken into account the occupation, duties or place of duty of the military personnel. The Committee found that the CAF had not fulfilled its obligation to ensure that Charter rights were minimally impaired in the application of this policy. The Committee therefore found that the breach of the grievor's Charter rights was not justified under Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter).

Furthermore, the Committee found that the administrative measures, including the remedial measures and release, should not have been imposed on the grievor since he was exercising a Charter right. Finally, the Committee concluded that these administrative measures were unreasonable due to serious breaches of procedural fairness.

The Committee conducted an in-depth analysis to see whether the requirement to register one's immunization status in the Monitor Military Administrative Support System in light of the CAF COVID-19 vaccination policy violated the rights guaranteed by Section 8 of the Charter and the Privacy Act. The Committee found that, given that the infringement was modest and outweighed by the public interest, this policy was justified and proportionate.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority set aside the remedial measures and facilitate the grievor's re-enrolment, if he so wished and was eligible.