Case # 2009-088

Reserve Force Retirement Gratuity

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2010-02-25

The grievor retired from the Regular Force (Reg F) and transferred to the Supplementary Reserve (Supp Res). While a member of the Supp Res, the grievor served on a series of attached postings to the Primary Reserve (P Res) on Class “B” Reserve Service (Cl B svc) over a period of about five and one-half years. With the exception of mandatory breaks in service to avoid becoming deemed to be re-enrolled in the Reg F for pension purposes, the Cl B svc was essentially continuous.

On release from the Supp Res and transfer back to the Reg F, the grievor applied for the Reserve Force Retirement Gratuity (RFRG) which was denied because he had never transferred to the P Res. He argued that the principle of Compensation and Benefits Instruction (CBI) 204.54 was to compensate those members who had provided full-time service. The grievor contended that, during the period of his attachment to the Supp Res he was treated as if he was a member of the P Res and, as such, should be entitled to the RFRG. The grievor also argued that his gaining unit was responsible to have transferred him to the P Res and, absent his request to do so, should have actioned a compulsory transfer.

As redress, the grievor requested that he be paid the RFRG for the period he was attached posted to the P Res.

The initial authority (IA), the Chief of Military Personnel, denied redress because the grievor was never actually transferred to the P Res and the eligibility for the RFRG required a minimum of three years service in the P Res. Further, the grievor did not have an authorized P Res Military Occupation Specification Identification (MOSID) until 1 March 2007 and could not, therefore, have been transferred to the P Res. The IA explained that no authority existed in the National Defence Act (NDA) or the Queen’s Regulations and Orders (QR&O) to make a transfer from the Supp Res to the P Res retroactive.

The Board found that:

• the grievor is not entitled to the RFRG because he was never transferred to the P Res;

• the deemed service provision of CBI 204.54 does not apply to the grievor because he was not serving on Cl B svc on 1 April 1997;

• contrary to the IA’s position, the grievor did have a window between 3 January 2001 and 31 August 2004 in which he could have voluntarily transferred to the P Res into a valid P Res occupation;

• the grievor could not have been compulsorily transferred to the P Res because that would have increased his obligation to serve, contrary to QR&O 10.06;

• the grievor could not have been transferred to the P Res after 31 August 2004 because he then did not have a valid P Res MOSID until 1 March 2007; and in any event, there was a restriction in place on the hiring of members of the grievor's MOSID into the P Res.

The Board recommended that the grievance be denied.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2010-08-23

The CDS agreed with the Board's findings and its recommendation to deny the grievance. The CDS was satisfied that the grievor had been treated appropriately under the regulations governing the Reserve Force Retirement Gratuity