# 2012-071 Releases, Administrative Review, Medical Employment Limitation (MEL), Pension Benefits, Release - Benefits, Release - Medical, Release - Voluntary, Reserve Force

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2012–08–17

The grievor, a member of the Primary Reserve, disputed her effective release date. While on Class B Reserve Service, the grievor requested a voluntary release to be effective in late 2010. Based on her previously approved permanent medical category (PCAT) and medical employment limitations (MEL) dating back to the late 1990s, the grievor had assumed that her release item would automatically be changed from voluntary to medical during the administrative process.

However, in response to a query from the release Approving Authority (AA) staff regarding the grievor’s medical status, the Director Medical Policy (D Med Pol) indicated that, although the grievor’s previous MEL had breached the Universality of Service (U of S), the grievor was retained without restrictions at that time. Pointing out that the grievor’s medical condition might no longer be in breach the U of S, the D Med Pol was unwilling to recommend a medical release without the benefit of a new medical review to clarify the situation.

Upon being so advised, the grievor withdrew the voluntary release request and submitted a grievance arguing that the AA could have authorized her medical release based on the previous PCAT and MEL which breached the U of S. The grievor suggested that the new medical process was designed to facilitate the denial of her medical release and she complained that the resulting delay was hurting her financially because she was receiving no pension payments. As redress, the grievor requested a medical release back-dated to the date she initially requested her voluntary release.

Following a new medical process, the D Med Pol approved a new PCAT and MEL and the AA approved a medical release based on an administrative review(AR)/MEL finding that the grievor’s new MEL breached the U of S.

The initial authority (IA) denied the grievance, finding that the new medical process was necessary and that it was initiated by the proper authority based on the D Med Pol recommendation. The IA determined that the medical process was conducted within normal timelines and that there was no reason to back-date the grievor’s release.

The Board considered that it was reasonable and necessary for the Canadian Forces authorities to re-assess the grievor’s PCAT and MEL, and to conduct a new AR/MEL to determine the grievor’s status with respect to the U of S. The Board found nothing in the process that was unfair or intended to deny the grievor a medical release. Finally, the Board found no fault with the approved release date and could find no reason to support back-dating the grievor’s medical release date.

The Board recommended that the Chief of the Defence Staff deny the grievance.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2013–07–10

The CDS agreed with the Board's findings and recommendation that the grievance be denied.