# 2021-048 Careers, Recorded warning

Case summary

F&R Date: 2022-03-25

The grievor disputed a recorded warning (RW) that he was issued following his return from deployment. The RW alleged that the grievor showed a profound lack of leadership and wanton disregard for his duties. The grievor contended that the RW grossly misrepresented his performance and that it was used as a tool of ongoing harassment by his chain of command (CoC). As redress, the grievor sought the removal of the RW from his file.

There was no Initial Authority (IA) decision as the IA failed to render a decision within the prescribed time limit and the grievor requested that his file be forwarded to the Final Authority (FA) for consideration and determination, pursuant to article 7.15 of the Queen's Regulations & Orders for the Canadian Forces.

As a preliminary issue, the Committee noted that the Defence Administrative Orders and Directives (DAOD) 5012-0, Harassment Prevention and Resolution, provides the appropriate process to be followed for the submission of harassment complaints.

The Committee then considered whether the administration of the RW complied with the policy requirements of the DAOD 5019-4, Remedial Measures. The Committee found that the RW process failed to provide procedural fairness to the grievor as he did not receive disclosure nor an opportunity to make representation prior to the RW decision. The Committee also found that the RW had several other issues, including that the wording failed to explain the nature of the deficiency to the grievor. Finally, the Committee found that the CoC had failed to provide reliable evidence to support the deficiencies noted in the RW.

The Committee found the grievor was aggrieved and recommended that redress be granted.

FA decision summary

The Director Canadian Forces Grievance Authority, acting as FA, agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation not to afford the grievor redress. The FA confirmed that the remedial measure was non-compliant with the directive in multiple ways, fatal to its validity. Consequently, the FA directed that it be removed from the grievor's personnel files. The FA also found that there was no reliable evidence to support the reissuance of another remedial measure.