Recommendations on Systemic Issues
There are 2 issues related to topic "Administration of Separation Expense".
Topic
Administration of Separation ExpenseCase number
2009-018 (F&R Date: 2009-09-14)Issue
The grievor married a foreign national while on posting outside Canada. Because of immigration requirements, the spouse could not immediately return to Canada with the grievor. The grievor was authorized free rations and quarters by his unit, as part of separation expense (SE) benefits. Months later, the grievor was informed that he was not entitled to SE and was asked to reimburse the amount received.
The Board observed, in this case, that the administration of SE was improperly done through the Director Compensation and Benefits Administration Aide-Memoire instead of the CBI 209.997. The Board was aware that the DCBA was seeking proper Treasury Board (TB) authorization to publish its Aide-Memoire as the approved regulations on non-relocation benefits. Given the number of inconsistencies noted between the different documents applicable to the administration of SE (CBI, Aide-Memoire and CANFORGEN), the Board felt that an in-depth review was required to minimize future issues of interpretation and application.
Recommendation
The Board recommended that the Chief of the Defence Staff direct an in-depth policy review and that representation be made to the TB regarding the SE benefits, in order to clearly address SE entitlements or ineligibilities, through proper regulations.
Final Authority Decision
PendingTopic
Administration of Separation ExpenseCase numbers
2009-045 (F&R Date: 2009-10-20)Issue
The grievor was a divorced member with a Court approved 50/50 shared custody arrangement for his children when he was posted from Halifax to Ottawa on an imposed restriction (IR) and, therefore, granted separation expense (SE).
Prior to authorizing the IR, the grievor's 50/50 shared-custody status had been discussed with the Director Military Careers (D Mil C) and both legal and Director Compensation and Benefits - Administration (DCBA) opinions had been sought. As a result, the D Mil C directed that, as long as the grievor could demonstrate the 50/50 shared custody arrangement, an IR could be authorized; it was.
Thirteen months after the grievor reported for duty in Ottawa, the DCBA explained that the grievor was not entitled to an IR or the SE because his children did not live with him full-time as set out in the DCBA 3 Aide-Memoire.
The initial authority, the Director General Compensation and Benefits (DGCB) recognized that the term "normally resident" found in the Compensation and Benefits Instructions (CBI) 209.997 could be misinterpreted but that the DCBA 3 Aide-Memoire was clear that the grievor's children had to be resident with him on a full-time basis.
The Board noted that the DCBA 3 Aide-Memoire explained that it modified the SE benefits based on Treasury Board (TB) approval in principle. The Board found that the full-time residency requirement of the DCBA Aide-Memoire went beyond amplifying the CBI and, in fact, placed limits on the benefits authorized by the TB; something that, in accordance with sections 12 and 13 of the National Defence Act, it cannot do without formal approval from the TB.
The Board observed that, in addition to this grievance, there had recently been other grievances where the DCBA 3 Aide-Memoire had been used to place limits on benefits approved by the TB.
Recommendation
The Board did not disagree with the DCBA intent to limit the SE to those members with full custody. However, the Board recommended that the Chief of the Defence Staff direct an in-depth policy review and make representation to TB with a view to clarifying SE to clearly address entitlements and eligibilities through appropriate regulations. The Board also recommended that the review address the situation of those members with shared custody arrangements.
The Board recommended that the CDS ensure that clear direction is issued to DCBA and the IR approval authorities regarding the circumstances under which an IR and associated SE benefits may be approved.
The Board recommended that the CDS direct that the practice of making changes to TB authorized regulations before formal approval should be discontinued.