# 2020-199 Pay and Benefits, Foreign Service Directives

Case summary

F&R Date: 2020-12-09

This is a group of six grievances where Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members posted outside of Canada (OUTCAN) were negatively affected by changes to Foreign Services Directive (FSD) 34.6. Prior to 1 April 2019, CAF members posted OUTCAN were entitled to receive postsecondary shelter assistance for dependants who were attending postsecondary institutions anywhere in Canada. However, on 1 April 2019, the FSD was changed to state that CAF members could receive postsecondary shelter assistance for dependants only if they attended postsecondary institutions located at the CAF member's last place of duty in Canada.

The Committee found that the new FSD applied to CAF members as of 1 April 2019, and the grievors were therefore not entitled to postsecondary shelter assistance, as their dependants were attending educational institutions not at the members' former place of duty.

Although the grievors had not been aggrieved by a decision, act, or omission in the affairs of the CAF, the Committee found that the grievors had been unfairly treated in the manner in which the change to the FSD had been implemented by the Treasury Board (TB) of Canada. There was no advance notice of the impending changes to the FSD and the grievors' dependants had already applied and been accepted at postsecondary institutions before the policy changed was announced. Financial commitments had been made by the grievors and their families based on existing policies and suddenly they no longer qualified to receive postsecondary shelter assistance.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority (FA) not afford the grievors redress but that a submission be sent to the TB on behalf of the affected members, requesting a one-year exception to the new FSD 34.6.

FA decision summary

The Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) acting as FA, agreed that the grievor had not been aggrieved by the administration of the affairs of the CAF and that he could not afford redress. He noted that, at his direction, Director Compensation Benefits Administration requested a TB review in June 2021, but the TB had refused to consider an amendment or an exception to the policy. The CDS acknowledged that the grievor had been treated unfairly by the timing and the poor communication associated with the change to policy.