# 2024-201 Careers, COVID-19, Land Duty Allowance, Personnel Evaluation Report

Case summary

F&R Date: 2025-09-02

The grievor argued that the denial of his request for religious accommodation under the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) COVID-19 vaccination policy was both procedurally flawed and discriminatory. Additionally, the grievor contested remedial measures (RM) issued for non-compliance with the COVID-19 vaccination policy, including an adverse Personnel Evaluation Report (PER) and the cessation of the Land Duty Allowance (LDA). As redress, the grievor requested that the removal of the RM from his file, amendment of his PER and retroactive payment of LDA for the time period affected by the vaccination policy.

Pursuant to subparagraph 7.13(c) of the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces, the grievance was not submitted to an Initial Authority because the decision in question was made by the Chief of Defence Staff.

The Committee found that the grievor had failed to establish a religious nexus required to grant a religious accommodation request as required by Defence Administrative Orders and Directives 5516-3, Religious or Spiritual Accommodation. The Committee found that the denial of the grievor's religious accommodation request was reasonable and the grievor was not aggrieved by it.

For the body of CAF COVID-19 vaccination policy related grievances, the Committee conducted an in-depth analysis of whether this policy infringed on the protected rights under section 7 the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter), namely the right to liberty and security of the person. The Committee concluded that the CAF vaccination policy infringed on these rights and that their limitation was not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. This was because the Committee viewed the policy, in some respects, to be arbitrary and overly broad, and because its implementation was disproportionate. This led to a full analysis and conclusion that such limitations were not justified under section 1 of the Charter.

The Committee also found that the RM, the comments and ratings in the PER pertaining to non-compliance with COVID-19 vaccination, and the cessation of LDA were unreasonable as the grievor was exercising a protected Charter right. 

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority quash the RM, that the PER be re-written without the influence of the RM issued for non-compliance with COVID-19 vaccination policy, and that he receive retroactive payment of LDA for the time period affected by the vaccination requirement.