# 2015-212 Careers, Component Transfer (CT), Incentive Pay Category (IPC)

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2015–10–16

The grievor, a Captain (Capt) in the Reserve Force was accepted for transfer to the Regular Force in a different occupation and was offered the rank of Lieutenant (Lt) with pay increment (PI) eight. The grievor accepted the offer but later challenged the fact that he had not been rank protected. When his transfer rank was changed to Capt, he asserted that he should be offered an increased PI at level three to be in line with the PI offered at the Lt rank.

During the investigation of the grievance, the Initial Authority (IA) determined that the grievor should have been rank protected due to the special skills and competencies that he possessed. However, the IA determined that the grievor's time in rank had been miscalculated and he would be only entitled to PI basic as a Capt with an incentive credit of 278 days towards the next PI.

The Committee determined that the grievor's previous service was correctly calculated by the IA and he should have been assigned the PI of Basic on transfer. However the Committee also found that it was unfair to retroactively change the grievor's conditions of transfer, which he relied upon in making the decision to give up both his and his spouse's civilian employment in accepting the offer.

The Committee noted that, although Canadian courts have determined that the relationship between the Crown and CAF members is not strictly speaking contractual in nature, it is incorrect to interpret this as meaning that there is no relationship of commitment. Referring to a previous decision by the CDS, where he agreed that enrollment offers should be enforced to the greatest degree possible, the Committee recommended that the CDS refer this file to the Director Claims and Civil Litigation to determine whether it meets the criteria for financial compensation.

FA Decision Summary

The FA agreed with the Committee's finding that the grievor was aggrieved, but he disagreed with its finding that the grievor was assigned the correct PI of Basic on transfer. The FA found that the grievor's training experience in the Res F, his two undergraduate degrees,and seven years of teaching warranted an increase in his Capt to IPC 3, and he acted on it. Consequently, the FA did not agree with the Committee's recommendation, which was based on a breach of promise by the CAF, that the grievor's file be sent to DCCL to determine whether the criteria for financial compensation were met.