# 2015-065 Pay and Benefits, Right to Grieve - Supplementary Reserve (Supp Res)

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2015–06–29

The grievor's request for Temporary Dual Residence Allowance (TDRA) was denied by Director Compensation and Benefits Administration (DCBA) based on their finding that the grievor's house had not been actively marketed in compliance with the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Policy (CF IRP) directive, as the listing price was not consistent with the appraised value.

The Initial Authority (IA) found that when the price had been lowered four months after the initial listing, the new listing price was consistent with the appraised value. The IA therefore recommended that the grievor be paid TDRA for the period from that date until the sale of the house.

The Committee found that exceptionally, two preliminary issues needed to be decided before the merits of the grievance could be considered. The first issue was whether Supplementary Reserve (Supp Res) members had the right to submit a grievance. The second issue was whether the IA had erred in accepting the grievance, in the interests of justice, nine months past the prescribed time limit.

The Committee found that, although not explicitly stated in the National Defence Act, the Queen's Regulations and Orders (QR&O), or the Defence Administrative Orders and Directives, Supp Res members have a right to submit a grievance.

The Committee also found that the IA had accepted the grievance based on a misconception of the reasons provided for its late submission and had therefore erred. Consequently, the Committee recommended that the IA decision be set aside and the grievance be denied on the basis that it was not submitted within the time limit stipulated in QR&O 7.02. The Committee did not believe it would be in the interest of justice to accept the late grievance.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2015–09–04

The FA disagreed with the Committee and concluded that it was in the interest of justice to accept the late grievance. The FA therefore returned the file to the Committee to determine the merit of the grievance. The FA did not address the Committee's systemic recommendation.