# 2024-328 Pay and Benefits, Allowances and Benefits, Canadian Forces Housing Differential

Case summary

F&R Date: 2024-12-20

The grievor disputed their disentitlement from the Canadian Forces Housing Differential (CFHD) allowance as a result of a component transfer from the Regular Force (Reg F) to Reserve Force (Res F). The grievor asserted that the CFHD policy is biased and unjust, as it has created an inequity between the Reg F and Res F. The grievor also argued that Res F and the Reg F members should be treated the same, and benefit from the same compensation and benefit package.

The Director General Compensation and Benefits, acting as the Initial Authority (IA), denied the grievance. The IA explained that for a new period of Res F employment, Compensation and Benefit Instructions for the Canadian Forces (CBI) 205.453(3) (Entitlement) specifies that to be entitled to CFHD, a member must be on a nationally solicited period of Class “B” or “C” Res F service at a new place of duty and have been authorized a move at public expense to that new place of duty. In the grievor's case, they transferred from the Reg F to the Res F as a local hire and their place of duty did not change. Therefore, the IA concluded that once the grievor transferred to the Res F, they were no longer entitled to the CFHD.

The Committee agreed with the IA that in accordance with CBI 205.453, the grievor was not entitled to receive the CFHD allowance as a locally hired Res F member. 

The Committee also addressed the grievor's argument that Reg F and Res F members should have the same benefit packages. The Committee found that given the inherent differences between the components in terms of unlimited liability, imposed separation and posting turbulence, it was logical and reasonable that different compensation and benefit packages exist.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority not afford redress.