# 2024-289 Pay and Benefits, Class C Reserve Service, Release - Benefits, Release - Medical

Case summary

F&R Date: 2026-02-17

The grievor was released from the Reserve Force (Res F) of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) under item 3(b) – on medical grounds, per table to article 15.01 of the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces. The day before his release, the grievor submitted two grievances challenging the fact that all Class “B” members are automatically considered to have non-complex transition needs, thereby precluding eligibility for an Integrated Transition Plan (ITP), as well as the denial of an Intended Place of Residence (IPR) move upon release. In their grievances, the grievor alleged that a complexity assessment had been conducted, albeit in error, and that his transition needs had been assessed as complex. Therefore, he argued that he should have been eligible for a three-year period of transition, including an ITP, and relocation benefits. As redress, the grievor sought correction of the complexity assessment in the Administrative Review (AR) decision, a re-evaluation of his case, compensation for loss of income, and IPR relocation benefits, or financial compensation in lieu of those entitlements.

Both grievances were forwarded to the Final Authority (FA): one was sent directly, as the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) was the decision maker, while the other was rejected because the time limit for submitting a grievance had been exceeded.

The Committee first addressed procedural fairness in the grievor's AR, noting that the grievor had been informed that his transition needs were non-complex. As the grievor had an opportunity to provide additional comments to the CDS and the Director of Military Careers Administration prior to their AR decisions, the Committee concluded that there was no breach of procedural fairness. The Committee then conducted an in-depth analysis of the options for Period of Retention (POR) and ITP for Res F members. As the grievor was unable to perform any military duties, he did not meet the conditions for a POR. However, as the grievor had complex transition needs, the Committee concluded that his case had not been administered properly and that he should have been offered an ITP assessment. Ultimately, the Committee found that the grievor was not entitled to an IPR move as it is an entitlement for Regular Force released members. As the grievor was not moved to another location at public expense for a Res F term of service, the Committee explained that they were not entitled to IPR relocation benefits. 

The Committee recommended that the FA afford redress to the grievor by acknowledging that their medical release from the CAF and their transition to civilian life was not administered to the full extent of appropriate support and consider offering an apology to the grievor.