# 2022-291 Careers, Voluntary Occupational Transfer

Case summary

F&R Date: 2024-09-12

The grievor contested the administration of three Voluntary Occupational Transfer - Untrained (VOT-U) applications. He claimed that the established process for VOT-U applications was not followed and that he received poor support from his chain of command (CoC). More specifically, the grievor explained that he was never properly considered nor notified of the results. The grievor requested that his application be reconsidered and accepted, and that he be given priority for training opportunities in his desired occupation to redress the delays he incurred.

The Director General Military Careers, acting as the Initial Authority (IA), denied redress. The IA stated that the grievor's contentions regarding his first and second applications would not be addressed as they were submitted past the three-month grievance submission time limit set out at Article 7.06 of the Queens Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces. Regarding his third application, the IA found that the grievor was not sufficiently competitive, that the process was followed and fair, and that his CoC fulfilled their role pursuant to the relevant Canadian Forces General message setting-out the requirement for Personnel Selection Officers (PSO) to notify applicants of their non-selection.

The Committee found that, as the grievor had not yet reached the Occupationally Functional Point, he was not eligible for consideration for the VOT campaigns in the first two years he applied. Regarding his third application, the Committee found that the grievor was not sufficiently competitive to be selected due to a combination of the lower priority for VOT-U transfers, and the highly competitive nature of his desired occupation of Pilot. Lastly, the Committee found that the grievor's CoC and the PSO could have demonstrated greater care and attention in communicating with the grievor to ensure he was better informed. Due to the poor communication, the Committee found that the grievor was aggrieved and recommended that the Final Authority acknowledge the communication shortfalls and how they affected the grievor's moral.