# 2023-097 Careers, Release - Compulsory, Judge Arbour Rec. 10 – sexual-related files

Case summary

F&R Date: 2026-06-02

The grievor contested his release from the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) arguing that he had been the victim of a Harmful and Inappropriate Sexual Behaviour (HISB) incident and the resulting trauma was the cause of his performance deficiencies on his occupational qualification course. As such, he argued that he should have been assigned HISB-related medical employment limitations (MELs), given optimized medical care and afforded the opportunity to recover and continue in his current occupation or another, in accordance with the Chief of Defence Staff Directive - Retention of CAF Members Affected by Harmful and Inappropriate Sexual Behaviour (“CDS Directive”). Further, he argued that the commandant (Cmdt) of the Training Establishment (TE) did not have the authority to release him, rather the authority rested with his home unit. 

The Commander of 2 Canadian Air Division, acting as the Initial Authority, denied the grievance finding that the CDS Directive did not apply to the grievor's situation, that release is a permissible outcome of a Performance Review Board (PRB) and that the Cmdt of the TE was the appropriate release authority. 

The Committee first addressed the grievor's concerns regarding release authority and applicability of the CDS Directive. The Committee found that since the grievor was untrained in his occupation and posted to the Basic Training List, rather than an occupational unit, the Comdt of the TE retained release authority pursuant to the CDS Delegated Release Authorities Matrix. The Committee also found that the CDS Directive did not apply as the grievor did not have MELs that prevented him from serving in the CAF, he was not being considered for a medical release, and the CDS Directive does not preclude the release of a victim of HISB for reasons unrelated to the HISB incident, i.e., for training failure.

The Committee then found that the Qualification Standards (QS) for the grievor's occupational qualification course listed and defined conduct and human performance as respective professional qualities to be assessed during the course as a performance objective. Failure to meet these standards would lead to a PRB and/or release from the CAF. 

The Committee found that the grievor's training file since enrollment showed a documented history of conduct and performance deficiencies which the grievor appeared unable to improve despite the CAF's efforts to identify and counsel him. Even when setting aside the conduct issues on course which the grievor argues were caused by his HISB incident, the Committee found there to be sufficient evidence of the grievor's failure to meet training standards, as defined in the QS, predating the HISB incident, justifying the PRB's recommendation to cease training and release him from the CAF under item 5(d) Not advantageously employable due to an inherent lack of ability or aptitude to meet occupation specification standards.

The Committee recommended the Final Authority deny the grievance and not afford redress.