# 2021-203 Careers, Remedial Measures

Case summary

F&R Date: 2022-10-06

The grievor disputed an Initial Counselling (IC) for conduct for failing to obey a written and verbal order. The grievor alleged that his chain of command issued the IC in retribution for submitting other grievances, and that the assigned task could not be completed as assigned.

The initial authority (IA) denied redress, noting that an IC was a reasonable action when the grievor did not conduct the task as directed, finding there was sufficient time to do so. The IA also noted that the grievor should have informed the chain of command (CoC) if he felt he could not complete the task, and that the grievor took no action to inform the CoC.

The Committee found there was no evidence of the IC being issued as retribution. However, the Committee found that the IC administration was lacking in terms of notification, disclosure and procedural fairness in general, and that the wording of the deficiency was inappropriate. Finally, the Committee concluded that there was still a requirement for an appropriately worded IC.

The Committee recommended the Final Authority afford partial redress by quashing the disputed IC, ordering the removal of all records of it from the grievor's personnel file, and issuing the grievor a more appropriately worded IC to reflect his conduct deficiency.

FA decision summary

The Chief Professional Conduct and Culture, acting as FA, agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation not to afford the grievor redress.