# 2024-027 Careers, Class A Reserve Service, Succession Planning, Succession Planning in the Canadian Forces

Case summary

F&R Date: 2024-11-28

The grievor, an infantry officer in the Reserve Force, was the subject of a disciplinary investigation after having inappropriately removed a remedial measure from the file of one of his subordinates and deleted a remedial measure from his own file without authorization. The grievor denied the allegations against him and accused his subordinate. The grievor then filed four grievances to contest the disciplinary investigation process initiated against him as well as the resulting remedial measures, including a recorded warning (RW) and a notification of cessation of service. In his grievances, the grievor challenged the lack of transparency from the chain of command (CoC) throughout the investigation, as well as the questionable credibility of his subordinate as a witness. Given his favourable performance record throughout his career, the grievor is of the opinion that his CoC had abused its authority by deliberately excluding him from the succession plan in order to end his contract without justification. As redress, the grievor is requesting the cancellation of the disciplinary investigation, the removal of the RW from his personnel file, his reintegration into the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and his appointment to a position within 2nd Division, Army Command (2 Cdn Div). 

The Commander of the Canadian Army, acting as Initial Authority (IA), found that the disciplinary investigation clearly established that the grievor had indeed committed the alleged offences and that the measures taken were fully justified. According to the IA, procedural fairness throughout the investigation was not compromised, and the grievor did not provide sufficient evidence to question this aspect. Given the absence of an available position within 2 Cdn Div, the grievor received a notice of cessation in which he was given the opportunity to find a position within another unit in order to continue his career in the CAF. As the grievor was unable to find a position elsewhere, the decision to release him was justified. 

The Committee found that the disciplinary investigation was conducted fairly and that the assessment of the evidence was conducted reasonably, in accordance with the principles of procedural fairness. The Committee also found that the grievor had demonstrated extremely poor judgment for a superior officer with many years of experience in the CAF. Given his rank and responsibilities and the seriousness of the alleged acts, remedial measures were necessary in this case. The Committee determined that because of the grievor's misconduct and his attitude throughout the investigation, it was reasonable to exclude him from succession planning within 2 Cdn Div. Finally, owing to the grievor's failure to find another position within the CAF, the notification of cessation of service was deemed appropriate. The Committee recommended that the Final Authority not grant redress to the grievor.