# 2016-151 Careers, Selection Board

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2016–10–28

Initially, the grievor contended that discounting her Reserve Force (ResF) Personnel Evaluation Report (PER) by 50% for the purpose of establishing the Selection Board Candidates List (SBCL) was unfair since she was essentially employed in the same military occupation structure (MOS) while in the ResF.

The Director General Military Careers, acting as the Initial Authority (IA), found that the grievor was aggrieved and concluded that the rigid application of policy caused her ResF PER to be discounted for the SBCL. The IA explained that her de facto employment in her MOS during that reporting period warranted scoring at 100%. Through a case analysis the IA established that her ranking would not be high enough for promotion and decided that a supplementary board was not required unless the number of promotions increased. Following the IA's decision, the grievor maintained that her grievance was not resolved because all of her service was not considered as part of the case analysis and requested that her file be reviewed by a Selection Board.

The Committee found that it was unreasonable to fail to direct the convening of a supplementary board as the grievor's corrected SBCL score was above the cut-off line. The Committee also found that assessing her competitiveness through a case analysis was unnecessary as the other files above the SBCL cut-off line were not validated in the same manner. Moreover, the Committee noted that the case analysis, if one had been required, was inaccurate and should also have led to the recommendation of a supplementary board.

The Committee recommended that the Chief of Defense Staff order a supplementary board to assess the grievor's file.

FA Decision Summary

The DGCFGA agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation that the grievance be upheld and to partially grant redress by providing that a supplementary board be convened. The DGCFGA agreed that the grievor's career manager did not fully appreciate the grievor's past experience and her potential competitiveness. He directed that DGMC conduct a supplementary board to reassess the file.