Air Force Order 5006-17 Promotion Policy - Air Reserve


Air Force Order 5006-17 Promotion Policy - Air Reserve

Case number


The Committee found that Air Force Order (AFO) 5006-17 – Promotion Policy – Air Reserve (Res) (AFO), which was initially issued on 16 October 2003, is not compliant with Canadian Forces Administrative Order (CFAO) 49-5, in that it sets higher promotion standards for Air Reservists than are required by the CFAO.  Notwithstanding that the CFAO may be outdated, it is still in effect and must be adhered to with the policies pertaining to the occupational specifications and the professional development system.  Furthermore, based on the general application of AFO 5006-17 in the Royal Air Force, the Committee concluded that it is likely that other members of the Air Reserve may have been impacted by the higher promotion standards promulgated in this AFO. 


The Committee recommended that the: • Chief of the Defence Staff order a review of AFO 5006-17, CFAO 49-5, Defence Administrative Orders and Directives 5031-8 and A-PD-055-002/PP-002 in order to harmonize the orders and policies; • files of Air Reservists who may have been affected by the AFO since its implementation in 2003, should be examined in order to determine if any of them should have been promoted earlier, and if so, that their promotion seniority date be retroactively adjusted.

Final Authority Decision

The FA did not endorse the Committee's recommendations. The FA was of the opinion that CFAO 49-5 establishes the minimum criteria and although the requirements found in AFO 5006-17 for Air Res promotions to the rank of Capl are higher, it does not contravene the CFAO policy. In accordance with DAOD 1000-2, instruments can supplement and/or amplify policy and instruction and since the Comd Royal Air Force, who holds the authority to promote Reservists within his command, has the authority to publish supplemental orders outlining promition criteria as long as he does not contravene a higher policy (here the CFAO). For the FA, requiring a QL 5 for the operationally functional point which requires 18 mths employment in the grievor's "purple"QL 3 trade, and while the CFAO does not require such criteria, is correct.

Page details

Date modified: