# 2024-122 Pay and Benefits, Canadian Forces Severance Pay, Component Transfer

Case summary

F&R Date: 2025-07-21

The grievor contested his Canadian Forces Severance Pay (CFSP) calculation, as it did not include his non-commissioned member (NCM) Reserve Force (Res F) service prior to his enrolment in the Regular Officer Training Plan (ROTP) in the Regular Force (Reg F) in 1989. This reduced his years of continuous service and resulted in a reduction in his CFSP. He argued that the four-day gap was an administrative delay and should be considered a component transfer (CT), and not a true break in service. As redress, the grievor requested that his CFSP be recalculated to include his Res F service.

The Director General Compensation and Benefits, acting as the Initial Authority (IA), denied redress. The IA stated that Compensation and Benefit Instructions for the Canadian Forces 204.40 defined eligible service for the CFSP as the number of years of service after the most recent date of enrolment. The IA found this date to be the day the grievor enrolled in the Reg F after lawfully releasing under the Queen's Regulations & Orders for the Canadian Forces article 15.01 from the Res F with a four-day break in service. The IA found that the grievor was administered in accordance with the policies that were in effect at the time.

The Committee found that in 1989, the Canadian Forces Administrative Order 9-12, Regular Officer Training Plan, did not prohibit Res F members from entering the program through a CT to the Reg F, though it was silent on the administration of such. Then in 1995, the Canadian Forces General Message (CANFORGEN) 062/95, Canadian Forces Component Transfer Procedures – Primary Reserve to Regular Force, referenced the 1987 “Total Force” concept, emphasizing one of its major premises to be that members of the Res F are already recruited and enrolled members of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and therefore should not require further processing by the recruiting system. The Committee found that this reference demonstrated that prior to 1995, the CAF had intended to employ seamless CTs from the Res F to Reg F as far back as 1987, if not earlier. The CANFORGEN also stated that Primary Reservists applying for ROTP would be processed in accordance with “current practices”, but no official record could be found as to what those practices were.

In 2001, a letter from the Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources - Military) issued an interim policy where Res F NCMs would first CT to the Reg F as NCMs and would then be assigned to an officer training program at the appropriate rank. In 2010, the Chief of Defence Staff ruled that this interim policy had not stated an effective date and therefore, there was no bar to a retroactive application of that policy and he granted redress in several cases dating back as far as 1973. 

The Committee ultimately found that the grievor's four-day gap between his Res F release and Reg F enrolment to likely have been an administrative delay, as opposed to an intentional break. As such, the Committee found that the grievor was aggrieved and recommended that the Final Authority afford the grievor redress by adjusting the grievor's release date from the Res F by four days to not impact his CFSP calculation.