# 2024-142 Careers, RMC Physical Performance Test

Case summary

F&R Date: 2025-12-12

The grievor contested the denial of his request to finish his Engineering degree in person at the Royal Military College of Canada (RMC), after failing to achieve the required standard in the Physical Performance Test. As redress, the grievor requested to be permitted to complete his degree at RMC in person, with a change from the Regular Office Training Plan – RMC (ROTP-RMC) to ROTP – Civilian University (ROTP-CivU). 

The Commander Canadian Defence Academy, acting as the Initial Authority (IA), denied the grievance noting that for the RMC leadership, allowing cadets who had failed the ROTP to return to the college would create a double standard regarding how cadets can graduate. Furthermore, the IA noted that even though the grievor's occupation was not open to the Continuing Education Officer Training Plan (CEOTP) path, he had been granted a waiver to remain in the occupation with a General Science degree instead of the desired Engineering degree. The IA determined that the decision to direct the grievor to complete his bachelor's degree under the CEOTP was fair and in compliance with regulations.

The Committee found the Canadian Armed Forces' (CAF) rationale for not allowing a double standard for candidates both compelling and justified. The Committee noted that maintaining morale within a military unit would be significantly challenging if different standards of effort were imposed on separate groups, yet both ultimately earned the same degree. Moreover, although the grievor had failed to meet the required standard of the physical fitness pillar, he was afforded the chance to complete a program through CEOTP and continue his military career. Furthermore, the Committee confirmed that, ultimately, due to the unique circumstances of his degree and his academic path the grievor was permitted to complete his desired academic program through the CEOTP and accommodated by RMC. The Committee found that in the grievor's circumstances, considering the potential alternatives including release, the CAF's decision was fair, justified, and consistent with policy. The Committee recommended that the Final Authority not afford the grievor redress.