# 2020-176 Careers, Remedial measures

Case summary

F&R Date: 2021-06-25

The grievor was the Squadron Warrant Officer, the senior non-commissioned member (NCM) at her unit, when a suggestive video was sent from her social media account to several members of her unit, including subordinates. The grievor did not report the incident to her commanding officer (CO). One of the recipients, a subordinate, complained about the incident to the CO after the grievor had contacted him concerning the video. A Unit Disciplinary Investigation recommended that the grievor be given a recorded warning (RW), which the CO subsequently imposed. The grievor challenged the RW.

The Initial Authority (IA) found that while the grievor should have been given the chance to make representations before the RW was imposed, the grievance process guaranteed procedural fairness in this case. Given the grievor's position of authority in the unit and the potential negative impact on unit personnel, the IA found that a RW was appropriate in the circumstances. However, the IA found that the wording of the RW lacked clarity and directed that it be rewritten.

The Committee found that the grievor should have been allowed to make representations before the RW was imposed, but that the de novo review afforded by the grievance process rectified any breach of procedural fairness. The Committee also found that the grievor's failure to inform her CO of the incident as well as her subsequent attempts to diminish its significance amounted to a conduct deficiency. Indeed, the grievor’s conduct was contrary to her responsibilities as a member of the unit's leadership team. The Committee also found that a RW was appropriate because the grievor had previously been warned about similar conduct in the past. The Committee recommended that the RW be rewritten to clearly explain the standard that the grievor's conduct failed to meet.