# 2025-013 Releases, Cadet Instructor Cadre, Compulsory Retirement Age

Case summary

F&R Date: 2025-04-17

The grievor disputed the decision to deny his request for an extension beyond Compulsory Retirement Age (CRA). He argued that he had significant specialized experience and held qualifications that are specifically suited to work as a Cadet Instructor Cadre (CIC) officer. Moreover, he believed that the nature of the work of a CIC Officer was significantly and substantially different from the types of duties, training and operations that might be undertaken by Regular and Reserve Force members. He also asserted that in any equivalent civilian occupation there would be no compulsory retirement age for this type of work occupation. As such, the grievor objected to being denied an opportunity to serve beyond CRA.

The Commander of the Cadets and Junior Canadian Ranger Group, acting as the Initial Authority (IA) found that the grievor was aggrieved because the Commanding Officer did not have the authority to deny the grievor's request, but only to recommend or not recommend it to higher authority. The IA also found that no redress was possible because the grievor had been released and cannot be re-enrolled at the age of 65.

The Committee found that retention of a member past CRA is governed by paragraph 15.17(5) of the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces, which notes that such a retention may only be authorized by the Minister of National Defence or the Chief of the Defence Staff. The Committee concluded that retention beyond CRA is predicated on service needs rather than on a member's desire to be retained. The Committee found that there was no requirement to further extend the grievor to meet a service need. 

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority not afford redress.