# 2022-345 Careers, COVID-19

Case summary

F&R Date: 2025-01-24

The grievor contested the denial of his request for a religious accommodation under the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) COVID-19 vaccination policy, as well as the Remedial Measure (RM) issued for non-compliance with this policy. 

The Initial Authority (IA) found that while the grievor held sincere beliefs, he failed to demonstrate how those beliefs prevented vaccination against COVID-19. The IA also found that, as the grievor was initially non-compliant with the vaccination policy, issuing a RM was appropriate.

The Committee found that the grievor had failed to establish the religious nexus required to grant a religious accommodation request as required by Defence Administrative Order and Directive 5516-3, Religious or Spiritual Accommodation. Therefore, the Committee found that the denial was reasonable and the grievor was not aggrieved by it. 

For the body of CAF COVID-19 vaccination policy related grievances, the Committee conducted an in-depth analysis of whether this policy infringed on the protected rights under section 7 the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter), namely the right to liberty and security of the person. The Committee concluded that the CAF vaccination policy infringed on these rights and that their limitation was not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. This was because the Committee viewed the policy, in some respects, to be arbitrary and overly broad, and because its implementation was disproportionate. This led to a full analysis and conclusion that such limitations were not justified under section 1 of the Charter.

The Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) rendered decisions in previous grievances on this subject, disputing the Committee's analysis of the Charter provisions leading to its conclusion that the CAF COVID-19 vaccination policy infringed upon the protected rights of CAF members. Consequently, the Committee conducted additional review and considering the state of law, its position remained that the limitation imposed on their Charter rights was not justified under section 1 of the Charter. 

The Committee also found that the RM issued to the grievor was unjustified and unreasonable, as the grievor was exercising a protected Charter right, and even more so in this case as the grievor had clearly indicated his intention to vaccinate when his religious accommodation request was denied and before the RM was issued. Consequently, the Committee found that the grievor had been aggrieved by the issuance of the RM. Accordingly, the Committee recommended that the CDS afford the grievor redress ordering that the RM issued under the CAF COVID-19 vaccination policy be quashed, and that all associated documentation related to the measure be retrieved from the grievor's personnel file.