Ambiguity in the Posting Allowance Policy

Topic

Ambiguity in the Posting Allowance Policy

Case number

• 2011-125 (F&R Date: 2011–12–29)

Description

Section 3.4.03 of the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program (CF IRP) 2009 states that: “posting allowance [PA] is not payable when the posting is to the first place of duty where CF members will be employed after re-enrollment or transfer to the Regular Force [Reg F]”.

However, the CF lexicon does not use the term “employed” when speaking of CF members nor does it appear in the National Defence Act (NDA).  Section 33 of the NDA uses the term “duty” and provides that Reg F members are at all times liable to perform any lawful duty. In addition, section 1.4 of the CF IRP 2009 defines “place of duty” as the place at which a CF member usually performs normal military duties.

The Board observed that, even when CF members are posted to a place of duty such as a CF School where they will train to attain career status, they are receiving wages and are performing normal military duties.  The Board found that by using the term “employed”, the CF IRP creates ambiguity that seems to be used for the sole purpose of denying the PA to CF members during their first two postings.  The Board found that such a policy does not reflect the intent of the PA benefit.

Recommendation

The Board recommended that the Chief of the Defence Staff order a modification to section 3.4.03 of the CF IRP in order to correct this ambiguity.

Final Authority Decision

Since DGCB acknowledge the discrepancy between article 3.4.04 of the CF IRP and CBI 205.42 (now 208.849) and that it be will addressed as part of its review of renumeration and compensation benefits, the CDS was satisfied that the proper interpretation of the policy will be applied. The CDS did consider the Board's systemic recommendation that the CF IRP disposition be changed, but did not take specific action on it.