# 2021-268 Careers, Initial Counselling

Case summary

F&R Date: 2023-11-29

The grievor grieved the manner in which her chain of command (C of C) administered her initial counselling (IC), issued following a complaint received from a third party denouncing the grievor's conduct. She explained that procedural fairness had not been respected and that an informal approach should have been considered by the C of C to establish the full context of the complaint. Furthermore, personnel development reviews (PDRs) were used to justify the IC, even though, in her view, several points had improved over the years. The grievor is critical of the permanent and unfair repercussions that the PDRs have had and will continue to have on her career. As redress, the grievor sought the full and immediate withdrawal of the IC from her military file and the national archives, as well as the cancellation of the control measures for six months.

The Initial Authority found that the grievor had not filed her grievance within the prescribed time limits and it was therefore not in the interests of justice that it be accepted.

The Committee found that the details provided in the remedial measure were insufficient under Defence Administrative Order and Directive 5019-4. As for procedural fairness, three problems were identified: the grievor had never seen the complaint and no copy was provided to the Committee, the grievor was not given an opportunity to respond before the C of C made its decision regarding the remedial measure, and the wording of the remedial measure was deficient, in that it contained very little detail. In light of all the circumstances, the Committee found that there was a lack of reliable evidence to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that the grievor had demonstrated a conduct deficiency.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority cancel and withdraw the remedial measure from the grievor's file.