# 2024-076 Careers, Leave Entitlement

Case summary

F&R Date: 2025-02-27

The grievor challenged the denial of his request to participate in a Canadian Armed Forces Exercise as a civilian contractor through his consulting business.

The Initial Authority (IA) found the grievor to be aggrieved for several reasons. The IA found that while compensation was not warranted, the grievor's military duties would not have been impacted by the civil employment opportunity, his leave request aligned with leave policy, and he was not provided with a timely decision in denying participation in the civil employment opportunity, causing the grievor financial and reputational harm. The IA noted that while the grievor did not submit a Confidential Report, as required by Defence Administrative Order and Directive (DAOD) 7021-1 – Conflict of Interest, to assess the potential Conflict of Interest (CoI), it was not a significant factor in the chain of command's (CoC) ability to render a timely decision.

The Committee disagreed with the IA's characterization of the timeline of events, and the relevant issue. The evidence showed that the grievor was notified over a month prior to the employment opportunity of a perceived CoI and was advised that he did have his CoC's permission to proceed until further assessment. The Committee found the substantive issue to be the grievor's commitment to the civil employment without confirming his CoC's decision and despite the CoI, the issue of leave being irrelevant. When reviewing the circumstances of the civil employment opportunity, the Committee found that it created a real or perceived personal CoI, as defined in DAOD 7021-1, which justified denying the request. After the grievor submitted a Confidential Report, the Defence Ethics Program found that it created an organizational CoI, further supporting the denial of the grievor's request.

Consequently, the Committee recommended that the Final Authority deny the grievance.