Redress of Grievance – Mega thread [MERGED]

[jitterbug]

If I were the AO, I would call up the correspondent you have had at the IA (the DG's usually have staff dealing with this stuff). I'd remind them they are overdue and that their obligations require them to provide an updated timeline, and if it's not satisfactory to you, you can have your grievance forwarded to the Final Authority, essentially skipping the IA because they took too long.

Have you received disclosure from the Grievance Analyst yet?

The correspondent at the IA (also the grievance analyst) has not responded back every time either of us have tried to contact him (both phone and email).  Disclosure has not been received either.  The last thing I got was an email from the correspondent stating disclosure would be sent.  That was well over 4 months ago.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

DAOD 2017-1, Military Grievance Process

Four-Month Time Limit

9.8 In accordance with QR&O paragraph 7.15(2), an IA must consider and determine a grievance within four months. However, this may not always be possible due to the nature of the grievance or the exigencies of the service. As a result, an IA who is unable to comply with this obligation must notify the grievor in writing that:

a.the IA will not be able to consider and determine their grievance within the four-month time limit set out in QR&O paragraph 7.15(2), and provide an estimate of the date by which the IA might do so; and

b.the grievor may submit to the IA, for forwarding to the FA, a request to have the FA consider and determine the grievance without determination by the IA.

9.9 In any event, if the IA has not considered and determined the grievance within the four-month time limit, the grievor may:

a.choose to wait for the IA to consider and determine the grievance; or

b.request that the IA refer the grievance to the FA, who will then consider and determine the grievance.


*small point, but in the Grievance system, you have an AM (Assisting Member) not an AO (Assisting Officer).  They are not really the same and perform different functions.

If your AM is getting no reply back, also bear in mind...

Limitations on the Role of an Assisting Member

7.5 An assisting member assists a grievor but is not:
a.the personal representative of the grievor;

If you did decide to exercise your right to have the grievance forwarded to the FA, remember that there is no time limit for the FA to determine and grant/deny redress.

You might consider sending the Griev Analyst an email requesting an update IAW 9.8(a) of the DAOD.  They are not supposed to just give you the emergency test broadcast signal (I know it happens, believe me). 

However, the problem is there is no (real) accountability and repercussions in the CAFGS against IAs and GAs who do not perform the duties they are assigned. 

 

[Pusser]

Perhaps your CO should be engaged to contact the Analyst's boss to get an answer.  Your CO can also contact DGCFGA who can swing a bigger hammer.

 

[jitterbug]

Perhaps your CO should be engaged to contact the Analyst's boss to get an answer.  Your CO can also contact DGCFGA who can swing a bigger hammer.

Good point.  I'm going to the CO's office tomorrow to tell him how to do his job... ;D

 

[jitterbug]

Finally got a response back from IA.  They are requesting 3-5 weeks for a disclosure.  Also received a call from the FA and they stated that 3-5 was reasonable and in their opinion I should take it.  I'm going to give the IA the 3-5 weeks extension.  Thanks for the advice.

 

[ballz]

Finally got a response back from IA.  They are requesting 3-5 weeks for a disclosure.  Also received a call from the FA and they stated that 3-5 was reasonable and in their opinion I should take it.  I'm going to give the IA the 3-5 weeks extension.  Thanks for the advice.

I think you should push them for "how long until I get a decision from the IA." The fact that it took 4 months to even get a response, and then another "3-5 weeks" to get disclosure.... and then you'll want to respond to that disclosure... at which point the IA may want another abysmal amount of time to render a decision... you could easily be looking at another 5 months or more to get the actual decision.

Once again our standard in execution is quite embarrassing.

 

[TCM621]

I've said it before and I'll say it again.. The modern Canadian military would be 2 weeks late for D-day. We can't seem to do anything in a reasonable amount of time any more.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[TCM621]

Does anyone know the time frame a CO has to acknowledge receipt of a grievance/notice of intent? I can't find anything but a statement that the CO is supposed to assign ab assisting member "without delay".

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[ballz]

From DAOD 2017-1

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-defence-admin-orders-directives-2000/2017-1.page#dco

Duties on Receipt of a Grievance

6.2 Upon receipt of a grievance, and in accordance with QR&O article 7.09, Commanding Officer’s Duties on Receipt of Grievance, the CO must:

ensure the grievance complies with the conditions set out in QR&O article 7.08;
register it in the NGR;
acknowledge its receipt in writing to the grievor and provide the grievor with the NGR number; and
assign an assisting member in accordance with QR&O article 7.07, Duty to Assign Officer or Non-Commissioned Member to Assist.
Examination of a Grievance to Identify the Appropriate IA

6.3 In accordance with QR&O subparagraph 7.14(1)(a), Officers Who May Act as Initial Authority in Respect of Grievance, a CO may act as the IA if the CO can grant the redress sought by the grievor. However, if the grievance relates to the decision, act or omission of the CO or if the CO cannot grant the redress sought by the grievor, the CO cannot act as the IA. In these circumstances, the CO must ensure that the grievance is referred to the next superior officer who is responsible for dealing with the matter that is the subject of the grievance (see section 8 of this DAOD).

6.4 If a CO has received a grievance and cannot act as the IA, the CO must either:

consult with the CFGA to identify the appropriate IA and then forward the grievance file to that IA; or
forward the grievance file to the CFGA for review by the CFGA of the content of the grievance in any case in which the identification of the appropriate IA is problematic.
6.5 In either case under paragraph 6.4 of this DAOD, the CO must:
forward the grievance file within 10 days of receipt of the grievance;
include with the grievance file a cover letter setting out:
their comments concerning the merits of the grievance;
an explanation of any delay in forwarding the grievance; and
any additional relevant information; and
provide the grievor with a copy of that letter and any additional information forwarded with the grievance file.

While it doesn't explicitly say "the CO must acknowledge receipt of the grievance from the member within 10 days" it essentially gives him 10 days from the time of receipt to do the first step which includes providing the grievor with a copy.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Does anyone know the time frame a CO has to acknowledge receipt of a grievance/notice of intent?

Short question;  which was submitted - the NOI or a grievance?  IAW the black and white of the policy, a CAF member who submits a NOI is not formally a 'grievor' yet.  There is a requirement in the policy for the CO to sign a mbr's NOI but nothing about acknowledging receipt to the mbr.  Common sense would be for the CofC to reach out to the mbr, as part of informal resolution (the overall goal of a NOI).
-----------
4. Informal Complaint Resolution

Early Complaint Resolution

4.1 A grievance should normally not be the first step in remedying a complaint. The CDS Guidance to Commanding Officers, Chapter 17, Conflict Management, provides that every effort is to be made to resolve issues early, locally and informally, before they escalate to higher and more formal levels.

Submitting a Notice of Intent (NOI) to Grieve

4.2 Prior to submitting a grievance, a CAF member should submit a NOI to grieve to the chain of command to trigger resolution at the lowest possible level. The NOI template is found on the CFGA intranet site. A NOI:
a.does not preclude a CAF member from communicating with their commanding officer (CO) prior to submitting a grievance (see QR&O article 19.12, Communication with the Commanding Officer);
b.should be initiated as soon as possible after the decision, act or omission in question;
c.engages the chain of command to assist a CAF member in identifying the best complaint mechanism to potentially resolve the issue before it becomes a grievance; and
d.is most effective when the CO has the authority to resolve the problem.

Note – A NOI to grieve does not extend the time limit under QR&O paragraph 7.06(1), Time Limit to Submit Grievance, within which a grievance must be submitted by a CAF member.

4.3 A NOI to grieve must be:
a.submitted by the CAF member to their supervisor; and
b.signed by the CO of the CAF member.

5.1 A grievor is:
a.a CAF member who: i.is in the Regular Force or any sub-component of the Reserve Force (the Primary Reserve, Supplementary Reserve, Cadet Organizations Administration and Training Service or Canadian Rangers);
ii.has been aggrieved by a decision, act or omission in the administration of the affairs of the CAF; and
iii.has submitted to their CO a written and signed grievance seeking redress; or
b.a former CAF member who submitted a grievance before their release (see section 16 of this DAOD

 

[TCM621]

Short question;  which was submitted - the NOI or a grievance?  IAW the black and white of the policy, a CAF member who submits a NOI is not formally a 'grievor' yet.  There is a requirement in the policy for the CO to sign a mbr's NOI but nothing about acknowledging receipt to the mbr.  Common sense would be for the CofC to reach out to the mbr, as part of informal resolution (the overall goal of a NOI).
-----------
4. Informal Complaint Resolution

Early Complaint Resolution

4.1 A grievance should normally not be the first step in remedying a complaint. The CDS Guidance to Commanding Officers, Chapter 17, Conflict Management, provides that every effort is to be made to resolve issues early, locally and informally, before they escalate to higher and more formal levels.

Submitting a Notice of Intent (NOI) to Grieve

4.2 Prior to submitting a grievance, a CAF member should submit a NOI to grieve to the chain of command to trigger resolution at the lowest possible level. The NOI template is found on the CFGA intranet site. A NOI:
a.does not preclude a CAF member from communicating with their commanding officer (CO) prior to submitting a grievance (see QR&O article 19.12, Communication with the Commanding Officer);
b.should be initiated as soon as possible after the decision, act or omission in question;
c.engages the chain of command to assist a CAF member in identifying the best complaint mechanism to potentially resolve the issue before it becomes a grievance; and
d.is most effective when the CO has the authority to resolve the problem.

Note – A NOI to grieve does not extend the time limit under QR&O paragraph 7.06(1), Time Limit to Submit Grievance, within which a grievance must be submitted by a CAF member.

4.3 A NOI to grieve must be:
a.submitted by the CAF member to their supervisor; and
b.signed by the CO of the CAF member.

5.1 A grievor is:
a.a CAF member who: i.is in the Regular Force or any sub-component of the Reserve Force (the Primary Reserve, Supplementary Reserve, Cadet Organizations Administration and Training Service or Canadian Rangers);
ii.has been aggrieved by a decision, act or omission in the administration of the affairs of the CAF; and
iii.has submitted to their CO a written and signed grievance seeking redress; or
b.a former CAF member who submitted a grievance before their release (see section 16 of this DAOD

I was looking for an answer to both. I feel like there has to be some formal recognition but there doesn't seem to be. Step 1 is a "verbal" complaint, step 2 is a Notice of Intent and step 3 is submitting the grievance. At no point does the CO have to formally acknowledge anything (as far as I can find) yet the grievor has 3 months to decide whether to submit the formal grievance.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Well, they do have to sign the Mbr's NOI if submitted IAW Sect 4(3)(b) of the DAOD and/or WRT to a grievance, they have to acknowledge receipt of grievance to the griever IAW Sect 6.2 (c). 

From there, the next question is *can the CO act as the IA*?  That will determine the next actions required of the CO.

Examination of a Grievance to Identify the Appropriate IA

6.3 In accordance with QR&O subparagraph 7.14(1)(a), Officers Who May Act as Initial Authority in Respect of Grievance, a CO may act as the IA if the CO can grant the redress sought by the grievor. However, if the grievance relates to the decision, act or omission of the CO or if the CO cannot grant the redress sought by the grievor, the CO cannot act as the IA. In these circumstances, the CO must ensure that the grievance is referred to the next superior officer who is responsible for dealing with the matter that is the subject of the grievance (see section 8 of this DAOD).

Sects 6.4 and 6.5 amplify what else has to happen, as Ballz posted earlier, this is the first instance in the DAOD where a set timeline is detailed (10 days from receipt of grievance to forward it on to the CFGA or, if known, the IA).

Sect 9 of the DAOD has all the info that should apply if the CO can act as the IA, in which case they have 4 months to consider the grievance.  They are also required to acknowledge receipt of the grievance as an IA IAW Sect 9.3(a) of the DAOD.

If the (potential) grievor has yet to formally submit a grievance in writing, signed etc they aren't, by policy definition, a grievor at this point, even if they have submitted a NOI. That's why I was wondering.  From the DAOD, Sect 4.

Note – A NOI to grieve does not extend the time limit under QR&O paragraph 7.06(1), Time Limit to Submit Grievance, within which a grievance must be submitted by a CAF member.

Lastly, there is no formal Step 1 thru Step 3 process required.  The mbr can submit a grievance without communicating orally with their CO, or submitting a NOI.  However, the goal is always *lowest level possible* for resolution, and once a formal grievance is submitted, it has to be registered, tracked etc.  If speaking with the CO or communicating what issues the mbr has with a decision/act/omission to their CO via a NOI triggers a resolution process that results in a grievance NOT being submitted and the situation resolved favourable in the eyes of the mbr and CAF, that is the system working at its best at the lowest level. 

 

[TCM621]

Well, they do have to sign the Mbr's NOI if submitted IAW Sect 4(3)(b) of the DAOD and/or WRT to a grievance, they have to acknowledge receipt of grievance to the griever IAW Sect 6.2 (c). 

From there, the next question is *can the CO act as the IA*?  That will determine the next actions required of the CO.

Examination of a Grievance to Identify the Appropriate IA

6.3 In accordance with QR&O subparagraph 7.14(1)(a), Officers Who May Act as Initial Authority in Respect of Grievance, a CO may act as the IA if the CO can grant the redress sought by the grievor. However, if the grievance relates to the decision, act or omission of the CO or if the CO cannot grant the redress sought by the grievor, the CO cannot act as the IA. In these circumstances, the CO must ensure that the grievance is referred to the next superior officer who is responsible for dealing with the matter that is the subject of the grievance (see section 8 of this DAOD).

Sects 6.4 and 6.5 amplify what else has to happen, as Ballz posted earlier, this is the first instance in the DAOD where a set timeline is detailed (10 days from receipt of grievance to forward it on to the CFGA or, if known, the IA).

Sect 9 of the DAOD has all the info that should apply if the CO can act as the IA, in which case they have 4 months to consider the grievance.  They are also required to acknowledge receipt of the grievance as an IA IAW Sect 9.3(a) of the DAOD.

If the (potential) grievor has yet to formally submit a grievance in writing, signed etc they aren't, by policy definition, a grievor at this point, even if they have submitted a NOI. That's why I was wondering.  From the DAOD, Sect 4.

Note – A NOI to grieve does not extend the time limit under QR&O paragraph 7.06(1), Time Limit to Submit Grievance, within which a grievance must be submitted by a CAF member.

Lastly, there is no formal Step 1 thru Step 3 process required.  The mbr can submit a grievance without communicating orally with their CO, or submitting a NOI.  However, the goal is always *lowest level possible* for resolution, and once a formal grievance is submitted, it has to be registered, tracked etc.  If speaking with the CO or communicating what issues the mbr has with a decision/act/omission to their CO via a NOI triggers a resolution process that results in a grievance NOT being submitted and the situation resolved favourable in the eyes of the mbr and CAF, that is the system working at its best at the lowest level.

Sorry, I wasn't clear but your right there are no formal steps. More like levels of complaint. It seems like all the focus is on the member meeting deadlines and the CoC can do what they want with the except of the 10 days previously mentioned. I feel like there has to be some sort of recourse if your CoC just sits on it and does nothing.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

What level of the CofC is sitting on it...hypothetically?  If the CO isn't the IA, he has 10 days to forward it.  If he is the IA, he has 4 months to render decision, with all steps complete.

 

[TCM621]

What level of the CofC is sitting on it...hypothetically?  If the CO isn't the IA, he has 10 days to forward it.  If he is the IA, he has 4 months to render decision, with all steps complete.

Don't want to get into too much detail but the short answer I don't know. And I can't see a scenario where the CO could be the IA but I could be wrong.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Rgr;  if he/she is not able to be the IA, then...they have 10 days from receipt to get the train movin' in the right direction. 

 

[CombatMacguyver]

Where would one find information about the PER review request / redress etc. processes.

Everything I'm finding on the DIN is 404'ing

 

[Eye In The Sky]

The formal grievance stuff is here  http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-defence-admin-orders-directives-2000/2017-1.page#perg

But, as you know, try the lowest level possible route first.  http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-defence-admin-orders-directives-2000/2017-1.page#icr

Have you sat down with your superior(s), with copies of your initial PDR, PDR review, brag sheet etc and shown where you believe you achieved a higher score (or has the mbr, if not you)?

Also, with more detail, is the CFPAS Help File, Using CFPAS, Chap 1, Art 119, Replacement PER.

119. Replacement PER

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

General

1.  The reasons for replacing a PER range from correcting an administrative error to resolving an individual’s non-grievance or grievance request at the Unit level. Every effort is to be made to resolve PER disputes early, locally and informally. With the intent of mitigating and expediting resolution to disputes when they occur, the subordinate should be given time to review the PER and be encouraged to point out errors and omissions in the PER prior to signing. A best practice suggests that the subordinate be given a copy of their PER 24 hours in advance of their interview in order to allow time to read the PER, reflect on its content and prepare for a productive interview. In doing so, the subordinate may present additional information that causes the signatories to agree to make changes to the PER with or without submitting a grievance. Once the subordinate signs a PER, the signature on the PER signifies that he/she has read and understood the assessment, which includes personnel who refuse to sign. 

Note: The subordinate’s signature date or date refusing to sign on the PER becomes the reference date for time limits set out below.

2.  When adjudicating as commanding officer for non-grievances or initial authority for grievances, the following should be considered:

a.  the absence of a PDR or existence of a hostile relationship with a supervisor or other poor treatment, alleged or substantiated, is not, in and of itself, justification for higher scores or a better ranking (absence of a PDR is cause for consideration when writing the supervisor’s PER);

b.  the requirement for any change in score or promotion recommendation must be properly substantiated by the person with corroborated information congruent with the word pictures contained in the rating scales at a higher rating;

c.  the scores or ranking a person received the previous year are irrelevant in assessing the current year PER; and

d.  the fact that the person’s file was not selected for Annual Selection Board review or was not scored sufficiently to result in promotion is not justification for a higher score or ranking

Non-Grievance Request

3.  Commanding Officer (CO).  As the initial means to resolve PER disputes, COs are strongly encouraged to resolve non-grievances and administrative errors early and informally, rather than a grievance. The subordinate must sign the new PER within the specified non-grievance time limit, as a replacement PER’s late arrival greatly complicates the Annual Selection Board process.

Note: A unit CO who receives a PER dispute concerning a theatre PER must forward the non-grievance request to the appropriate theatre CO or commander (CJOC J1 Grievances).

4.  Administrative error. An administrative error has no impact on the Annual Selection Board processes. Errors made to any of the following areas of the PER are considered administrative errors and where uncertainty exists, DMCSS 2 should be consulted:


a.  Section 1 – Identification;

b.  Section 2 – General;

c.  Section 3 – Details of Employment/New Qualifications;

d.  Fitness Test; and

e.  Signature Blocks.


5. Non-grievance Time Limit. The time limit set out for the subordinate to sign the non-grievance replacement PER is no later than 01 August. In order to respect timely submission, the following staffing direction shall be adhered to when submitting current reporting period non-grievance replacement PERs:

a.  for cases of Annual PERs, the subordinate must sign the PER no later than 01 August of the current reporting period;

b.  for cases of Theatre PERs, the subordinate must sign the PER within 90 days from the date that the original was signed; and

c.  when the signing of a replacement PER is expected to exceed the non-grievance time limit, the CO is to contact DMCSS 2 by email to request an extension. Replacement PERs submitted under such grounds shall reference the email approval in the accompanying cover letter.


6.  Cover Letter. Submission requirements for Regular Force replacement PERs will vary depending on whether or not the new PER replaces a PER that has or has not already left the Unit:


a.  if the new PER replaces a PER that has left the unit, the CO must provide a cover letter with the new PER submission to the PER Processing Centre IAW chap 2 sect 203, Method of Transmission. The cover letter for non-grievances must;

i.  explain why the submission of the replacement PER was necessary,

ii.  provide an explanation in the event that any of the original signatories of sections 4, 5 or 6 (as appropriate) is not the same as those on the original PER, and

iii.  reference email approving the extension to non-grievance time limit.

b.  if the new PER replaces a PER that has not left the Unit, the new PER is to be submitted as per normal procedures contained in chap 2 sect 203, Method of Transmission.

Grievance Request

7.  Initial Authority (IA).  The grievance process allows a person to submit a grievance concerning the fairness, accuracy or appropriateness of a PER or its content. To permit COs and next superior officers in the CoC to fully manage PER disputes within their own organizations, streamlining their resolution, the applicable CO or next superior officer in the CoC who is responsible for the completion of the PER is the officer who must act as the IA for a grievance in respect of that PER. IAs are strongly encouraged to resolve grievances early and via informal resolution, as a replacement PER’s late arrival greatly complicates the Annual Selection Board process. The CO or next superior officer in the CoC cannot act as the IA when the officer was a signatory of the PER. DGCFGA is to be consulted in such cases to determine the appropriate IA (see DAOD 2017-1, Military Grievance Process).

Note: The IA for theatre replacement PERs is the appropriate theatre CO or commander (CJOC J1 Grievances).

8.  Grievance Time Limit. The grievor’s signature date on the original PER is the reference date for the submission of a grievance set out in QR&O 7.06 - Time Limit to Submit Grievance. The following staffing direction shall be adhered to when submitting grievance replacement PERs:

a.  a grievance replacement PER must be signed by the subordinate within 90 days of being satisfied with the IA’s determination; and

b.  all grievances must be registered with DGCFGA. In doing so, the subordinate and CoC ensure that time limits are adhered to IAW DAOD 2017-1, Military Grievance Process. Replacement PERs submitted under such grounds shall reference the grievance file number in the accompanying cover letter.

9.  Cover Letter. Submission requirements for Regular Force replacement PERs will vary depending on whether or not the new PER replaces a PER that has or has not already left the Unit:

a.  if the new PER replaces a PER that has left the unit, the IA must provide a cover letter with the new PER submission to PER Processing Centre IAW chap 2 sect 203, Method of Transmission. The cover letter for grievances must;

i.  indicate that the submission of the replacement PER is a result of a grievance determination;

ii.  provide an explanation in the event that any of the original signatories of sections 4, 5 or 6 (as appropriate) is not the same as those on the original PER; and

iii.  reference the grievance file number.

b.  if the new PER replaces a PER that has not left the Unit, the new PER is to be submitted as per normal procedures contained in chap 2 sect 203, Method of Transmission.

PER Amendments

10.  Replacement PERs submitted to the PER Processing Centre are analyzed automatically on receipt in order to determine any impact on the Annual Selection Board process that may require the convening of Supplementary Board. DMCSS 2 will advise the CO/IA of the results of the case analysis for disclosure to the subordinate/grievor.


11.  In order to avoid having the replacement PER returned to the originator, the CO/IA must ensure that the new PER is completed, specifically ensuring:

a.  no signatures are missing;

b.  applicable time limit for non-grievances at para 5 and grievances at para 8 above is adhered to;

c.  applicable cover letter requirements for non-grievances at para 6a and grievances para 9a above are adhered to;

d.  Dept ID is the same Dept ID as on the original PER;

e.  subordinate’s/grievor’s signature date is the day that the new PER is signed and not the dates as shown on the original PER; and

f.  replacement PER is CFPAS compliant.


Note: Replacement PERs will not be accepted when they are based on promotions that occur after 31 March with an effective date before 1 April (refer to sect 108(2)) and personnel who Opt Out (see sect 125).

 

[CombatMacguyver]

Fantastic thanks.

 

[AirDet]

To re-enforce what Eye In The Sky said, deal with this ASAP. If you don't get a resolution from your immediate CofC then draft the Notice to Grieve. If you do that right away your PER will be kept at the CO's Desk. He can hear and make changes if warranted. This is much easier than the full ROG and means your file won't be at risk for missing the boards.

Trust me on this; the secret is getting it done ASAP and have proof/evidence for everything you claim needs to be changed. The better the proof; the better your chances.

Good luck.