# 2013-059 Careers, Class B Reserve Service

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2013–08–26

The grievor was briefed by the Chain of Command that he could apply for, and receive, continuous Class B Reserve Service, following the conclusion of a large spring Exercise. The grievor submitted his expression of interest and anticipated summer employment immediately following the Exercise.

Notwithstanding the intent to offer continuous Class B Reserve Service, there was a 20-day gap between the end of the Exercise and the commencement of the grievor's Class B Reserve Service. The grievor submitted a grievance, seeking compensation for the 20 days of lost employment.

The Initial Authority denied the grievance, having concluded that statements of intent could not be construed as representing a personal offer of employment. The Initial Authority acknowledged the expressed intent to provide continuous employment to Reservists, but noted that that intent was also subject to variable factors and conditions, such as organizational needs, rank, experience and so forth.

The Committee found that the grievor, and others, were led to believe that continuous Class B Reserve Service would be immediately available following the Exercise, and that although it was a clearly expressed intent, unfortunately it did not occur. As a result, promises were made but not kept. Although the grievor was wronged, the Committee found no evidence that it was deliberate.

The Committee then considered article 4.10 of Canadian Forces Military Personnel Instruction 20/04 – Administrative Policy of Class “A”, Class “B”, and Class “C” Reserve Service, which holds that Class B Reserve Service cannot commence until such time as an authority document and Route Letter have been issued. In this case, the authorization documents were delayed and thus the Committee found that the grievor could not have been employed any earlier on Class B Reserve Service, nor could he have been paid for said service.

Given that the Chief of the Defence Staff cannot authorize payment for time not served, the Committee recommended that the grievance be denied. The Committee suggested that the grievor may wish to make a claim against the Crown through the Director Claims and Civil Litigation.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2013–11–12

The FA agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation to deny the grievance.