# 2022-071 Careers, Initial Counselling, Remedial Measures, Mental Health

Case summary

F&R Date: 2023-07-27

The grievor was issued a Personnel Development Review (PDR) and a subsequent initial counselling (IC) outlining performance deficiencies that had been documented by the grievor's Chain of Command (CoC) over the course of eighteen months. The grievor contested that he should not be held responsible for his performance deficiencies, as he had an undiagnosed mental illness, and there was inadequate follow-up of the PDR action plan. The grievor further argued that since his mental illness is a disability, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) cannot discriminate against him by pursuing disciplinary action. As redress, the grievor requested that the IC be removed from his personnel file. 

The grievor's civilian psychologist stated that he disagreed that the grievor should be held accountable for his performance deficiencies since most were symptoms of his mental illness. In contrast, a CAF surgeon stated that the grievor still has some personal accountability and, in their opinion, was competent to make decisions.  

The Initial Authority (IA) determined that the grievor was treated in accordance with the Defence Administrative Orders and Directives (DAOD) 5019-4, Remedial Measures (RM), as he did not meet the applicable standard of performance over a reasonable amount of time. The IA stated that the grievor's CoC provided significant support mechanisms and that the existence of a medical condition does not automatically absolve a member of their performance deficiencies.  

The Committee discussed that as per DAOD 5019-4, determining the accountability of the performance deficiencies was not the issue to be considered; rather, it was whether the presence of a medical condition that could explain performance deficiencies is fatal to the administration of the RM program. The Committee noted that the RM program is administrative, and not disciplinary, and the purpose is to initiate a formal and documented conversation with a CAF member when deficiencies occur. In the grievor's circumstances, the RM program signaled a need for a medical diagnostic and treatment plan. 

The Committee found that issuing the grievor an IC was the appropriate action to take and the CoC acted in accordance with applicable policies. Further, the grievor was not discriminated against as he was not treated adversely due to his diagnosis. 

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority not afford the grievor redress.