Refusing his/her release

[DARTAGNAN]

I won't give more details but I wanted to know what could happen if a member voluntarily failed to do the paperwork before the date of his/her release because he/she feels that his/her admin review process has been unfairly conducted ?

And what would be the member avenues ? 

 

[medicineman]

Given the speed of some releases I've seen over the years, the paperwork would not only be done for you, it would in fact be expedited.  If you/your firend/comrade/subordinate think there is an issue with their AR, then a formal redress would need to be written.  There is usually a timeline and the person concerned usually has an assisting officer appointed for such things.

:2c:

MM

 

[ModlrMike]

As a directed release, one can not refuse to be released; the process will happen whether you want it to or not. If you feel your AR was unfair, then there are going to be instructions given to you on how to proceed, as part of your disclosure package. You can not file a redress of grievance once you're released, so if you feel that you have been unfairly treated, you need to get on with it now.

 

[WEng87]

You have 15 business days from the date you are given your AR Disclosure package, to submit written representation for yourself to your CoC and DMCA.

I had a member who would not accept their AR Disclosure, would not lay hands on it....  the process still carried on, 15 days after the fact and there was still no written representation.... again, the process proceeded and DMCA made their decision based on what they had.

So you/they/him/her should really take those 15 days to write a solid representation against every point in your disclosure package....  if you are still not happy with the decision after that, then go the regular route of grievences.  (I'd have this prepared before the decision comes back, ready to submit in the instance that your release happens quickly)

my  :2c:

 

[DARTAGNAN]

All interesting answers but the CAF prefer releasing a member rather to know the bottom of the story. For the member's story, there have been already two grievances, second one is for unfair PRB that led to an admin review (grievance has been submitted in early 2017). The CAF had the time to conduct two full admin reviews while none of the grievances have been answered and are the causes of the AR, that is simply an administrative failure on their side. 

 

[Jarnhamar]

Agree with the advice given.  Process moves on regardless.  A representation by the member is a last chance to plead your case. If you feel you're treated unfairly then it itemize it in the representation.  Refusing to do it doesn't stop the process.

 

[medicineman]

I had a member who would not accept their AR Disclosure, would not lay hands on it....  the process still carried on, 15 days after the fact and there was still no written representation.... again, the process proceeded and DMCA made their decision based on what they had.

I'm still amazed at how many people out there still think if they don't look at or sign something that it doesn't count (PER's, AR's, etc), just because they don't agree with it.  With the short fuse on the AR's, as much as it's something they don't want to hear, you'd think that people would stop tossing the teddy in the corner and come up with a coherent reason they shouldn't be shown the door.  Part of the grief process I guess - denial and anger.

MM

 

[DARTAGNAN]

But how is this relevant when grievances can take up to two years to be dealt with and the member already set a new life out there ? How grievance that has been submitted 6 months prior to the first of two admin reviews has still not being answered ?

 

[mariomike]

Some of this may be relevant as background. Adding for reference to the discussion,
https://milnet.ca/forums/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=117874

 

[WEng87]

But how is this relevant when grievances can take up to two years to be dealt with and the member already set a new life out there ? How grievance that has been submitted 6 months prior to the first of two admin reviews has still not being answered ?

an AR can/does/will happen even if there are grievances still on the table unanswered.  I had a peer submit a grievance over his AR the day before he turned in his ID, not sure how that turned out in the end.

 

[DARTAGNAN]

I know all this. But am I the only one to think when grievances have been going on over a year, the system is possibly failing to avoid an admin  burden on their side in the case the member should have not been released in the first place  because grievance system  do not talk to admin review system ? Its still some admin to bring a guy in. We are sorry, we've been  too impetuous to kick out because we have a dysfunctional  system that's working at many different speeds and do not communicate between each other and after some wondering why we struggle to enroll people...

 

[PuckChaser]

If we're going to talk about admin burdens, you may fall under that category. Just because you don't agree with the system doesn't mean it's wrong. After looking at your posting history, you've got 2 grievances, a PRB, and multiple major medical issues in your short career thus far.

Maybe it's not the system's fault here...

 

[Pusser]

I know all this. But am I the only one to think when grievances have been going on over a year, the system is possibly failing to avoid an admin  burden on their side in the case the member should have not been released in the first place  because grievance system  do not talk to admin review system ? Its still some admin to bring a guy in. We are sorry, we've been  too impetuous to kick out because we have a dysfunctional  system that's working at many different speeds and do not communicate between each other and after some wondering why we struggle to enroll people...

The AR and grievance processes are separate and they need to be.  They each take a separate look at the situation (albeit from different points of view) and make decisions independently.  This is more fair than the possibility of one process simply taking the work of the other process and judging whether the process was correct without looking at actual problem.  Note that it is possible to grieve the AR process as well if you feel that mistakes were made.

Although there are time limits at the CO and Initial Authority (IA) levels of grievances, there are none at the Final Authority (FA) level.  Again this is a good thing.  This allows the FA to conduct a thorough analysis of the entire situation before rendering a decision.  Although the FA will look at the IA decision, it will not form the basis of the FA decision, which will come from a completely new and separate analysis.  FA decisions can and often do overturn IA decisions.

Note also, that one of the possible outcomes of the grievance process is an order to reinstate a member who has been released.

 

[brihard]

You continue coming here seeking the answers you want rather than the answers that are accurate. You don’t like that you’re being released and you feel hard done by. Got it. At this point the last suggestion that can probably be offered is that you seek a lawyer versed in military law and process.

It is not unusual for members of the CAF who are on the way out involuntarily to feel that they are victims of some wrongful process. Typically that is not the case. The military simply prioritizes the effective functioning of the military, and not every individual is suited to that. Perhaps you would be best served by directing your energies towards preparing for transition into a civilian career of some sort, rather than kicking at the waves in hopes the tide won’t come in.

 

[CountDC]

It seems what you want is to be able to drag out a release indefinitely by submitting grievances.  How is that fair to the CAF and its members?

 

[BeyondTheNow]

All interesting answers but the CAF prefer releasing a member rather to know the bottom of the story. For the member's story, there have been already two grievances, second one is for unfair PRB that led to an admin review (grievance has been submitted in early 2017). The CAF had the time to conduct two full admin reviews while none of the grievances have been answered and are the causes of the AR, that is simply an administrative failure on their side.

I appreciate the effort you're trying to put in by attempting to speak generally, or suggesting that your questions are referring to another member's situation. But it's fairly easy to assume, by your previous posts, that you're referring to yourself. For the sake of clarity and for those who are trying their best to answer your questions, please just say I or me.

 

[mariomike]

I appreciate the effort you're trying to put in by attempting to speak generally, or suggesting that your questions are referring to another member's situation. But it's fairly easy to assume, by your previous posts, that you're referring to yourself. For the sake of clarity and for those who are trying their best to answer your questions, please just say I or me.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Given the speed of some releases I've seen over the years, the paperwork would not only be done for you, it would in fact be expedited.  If you/your firend/comrade/subordinate think there is an issue with their AR, then a formal redress would need to be written.  There is usually a timeline and the person concerned usually has an assisting officer member appointed for such things.

:2c:

MM

Just for accuracy...AMs are for grievances (AOs are another function) and can be NCMs (Sgt/PO2 and above) or Officers; there is an actual qual for AM now.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

All interesting answers but the CAF prefer releasing a member rather to know the bottom of the story. For the member's story, there have been already two grievances, second one is for unfair PRB that led to an admin review (grievance has been submitted in early 2017). The CAF had the time to conduct two full admin reviews while none of the grievances have been answered and are the causes of the AR, that is simply an administrative failure on their side.

If the grievances went to the IA, who rendered a decision that the griever did not agree with and referred it to the FA, the FA is not bound to any timeline what-so-ever.  Just a point to note.  If the grievances did not meet their timelines for the IA initially, the griever also has the right and ability to tell the IA to fwd to the FA for determination;  again, the FA has no timelines they must adhere to.

But, I am a little bewildered.  2 grievances were submitted that were never answered and those grievances caused 2 ARs?  Did the member ever receive F & R from the Grievance Committee?

http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-policies-standards-queens-regulations-orders-vol-01/ch-07.page#cha-007-18

7.21 - TYPES OF GRIEVANCES TO BE REFERRED TO GRIEVANCES COMMITTEE

For the purposes of subsection 29.12(1) of the National Defence Act, the final authority shall refer to the Grievances Committee any grievance relating to one or more of the following matters:
a.administrative action resulting in the forfeiture of or deductions from pay and allowances, reversion to a lower rank or release from the Canadian Forces;

 

[medicineman]

Just for accuracy...AMs are for grievances (AOs are another function) and can be NCMs (Sgt/PO2 and above) or Officers; there is an actual qual for AM now.

Interesting...though when I did it last, I was named as the AO (was a WO), but that was 8/9years ago.  Nice that you get a course now. 

MM


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk