# 2024-047 Careers, Release - Compulsory, Training Failure

Case summary

F&R Date: 2024-12-08

The grievor challenged the decision of the Commandant of the Canadian Forces Logistics Training Centre to order her release under item 5(d)—not advantageously employable—of the table to article 15.01 of the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces. This decision was made after the grievor made several career changes in the space of four years, without, however, managing to qualify for any of the occupations. She maintained that this decision was arbitrary and abusive, stating that her immediate commanding officer deliberately compromised her career opportunities, even though she had initiated a promising path toward a new change in occupation. As redress, the grievor asked that her release be cancelled and that her file be reviewed by another chain of command (CoC). 

The Initial Authority was unable to make a decision within the prescribed time frame. Therefore, the grievor asked that her grievance be referred to the Final Authority (FA). 

After reviewing the file, the Committee found that the decision to release the grievor was justified. The grievor failed to obtain qualifications in any of the occupations to which she was assigned since her enrolment in 2015, and her many requests for a change in occupation were not sufficiently substantiated to demonstrate a likelihood of success. Although some failures can be tied to health problems out of her control, others were not. The Committee noted that the Canadian Armed Forces must strike a balance between their commitment to support their members and the need for a judicious use of resources. In this case, after a number of unsuccessful initiatives, it was reasonable to conclude that additional investment in training was a poor use of resources. In addition, the Committee indicated that the CoC is authorized to undertake an administrative review for performance deficiencies, in accordance with Defence Administrative Order and Directive 5019-2, and to suspend requests for a change in occupation during this process. Finally, the Committee rejected the argument that the immediate Commading Officer had abused his authority, stating that he had the delegated authority to order a release under item 5(d). The release decision was deemed reasonable and it was determined that the grievor had not been aggrieved. The Committee recommended that the FA not grant redress to the grievor.