Grievance question

[jaysfan17]

Hello,

I will be submitting a grievance soon, but I wanted to ask some of the more experience members on here what the likelihood of it being successful is, without giving away too many details.

If you’re able to quote a policy that supports your grievance, how likely is it that it will be accepted? I imagine that 100% of the time it would be because the policy says so. Additionally, how much does the redress play a factor in a decision? I imagine there’s been some extreme redress requests that get negotiated (if that’s the right word) down a bit.

 

[PuckChaser]

With that little info, you're not getting an answer. If you have solid backing, your IA can solve the problem. If they don't agree with you, then you go into the pit of despair and wait 2-4 years for the FA (CDS or delegated officer) to decide. Before you submit, decide if the outcome you want is worth the potentially long wait.

The external board review grievance summaries are public. I'd highly suggest trying to find a case similar to yours and see if it was upheld. Case Summaries - Canada.ca

 

[Sprinting Thistle]

I think the answer is - it depends. Years ago I submitted a grievance for a move of DF&E where they wouldn't cover some of the costs related to moving pets. The policy that they cited to prevent reimbursement at the time had a gap about pet costs. I read the policy and argued that they couldn't deny because the policy was flawed and had holes. I won. Was reimbursed. Afterwards, they promptly changed the policy to cover those gaps. Fast forward in my career, and I filed a grievance about TOS. I cited policy and even had notes from a grievance analyst at the Initial Stage provide more examples of policy gaps to support my argument. However, I was denied at each level all the way to the FA. (note that each refusal at each level was for a different reason, no consistent responses). I went to JR and won. Now its back with the FA and the whole process restarted. So, it depends. Good luck and be prepared to wait a long time.

 

[jaysfan17]

Okay, thanks guys. I do realize it wasn't much to go on, but I do not want to disclose too much at this time.

 

[Lumber]

Hello,

I will be submitting a grievance soon, but I wanted to ask some of the more experience members on here what the likelihood of it being successful is, without giving away too many details.

If you’re able to quote a policy that supports your grievance, how likely is it that it will be accepted? I imagine that 100% of the time it would be because the policy says so. Additionally, how much does the redress play a factor in a decision? I imagine there’s been some extreme redress requests that get negotiated (if that’s the right word) down a bit.

If you're wondering if the CAF will still refuse to provide you a redress of grievance even though you have a clear cut policy that says you are entitled to that redress, just ask anyone regarding business class travel.

 

[ballz]

If you're wondering if the CAF will still refuse to provide you a redress of grievance even though you have a clear cut policy that says you are entitled to that redress, just ask anyone regarding business class travel.

Has anyone ever actually submitted a grievance over that and got denied? And at least pushed it the committee as opposed to just the IA?

Nothing toxic about that practice at all....

 

[Titanicswimteam]

I am a grievance analyst and can confirm that the system works quite well. Once you submit a grievance (which can now be done on-line OR hard copy to your unit) you receive a code starting with MG___, and you will be guaranteed two levels of review:
a. initial authority (either your CO or higher depending on who made the decision you are grieving)
b. final authority (usually the CDS's staff unless it is a PAR/PER grievance in which case it will be your Division Commander)

We grant things all the time. For most analysts, those files are the ones that keep you in the game - helping right wrongs. My only regret is that people don't use the system more often, fearing that they will be perceived as 'whining'. If you have been aggrieved, say something. Provide substantiation. Worst that will happen is you get a letter from someone like me explaining why it can't be supported - best case is you get what you deserve, or at least start the ball rolling to identify that a change of policy is merited. If in doubt, or you want some moral support, phone your local CCMS and ask what they think first. They are a great start.

 

[jaysfan17]

I am a grievance analyst and can confirm that the system works quite well. Once you submit a grievance (which can now be done on-line OR hard copy to your unit) you receive a code starting with MG___, and you will be guaranteed two levels of review:
a. initial authority (either your CO or higher depending on who made the decision you are grieving)
b. final authority (usually the CDS's staff unless it is a PAR/PER grievance in which case it will be your Division Commander)

We grant things all the time. For most analysts, those files are the ones that keep you in the game - helping right wrongs. My only regret is that people don't use the system more often, fearing that they will be perceived as 'whining'. If you have been aggrieved, say something. Provide substantiation. Worst that will happen is you get a letter from someone like me explaining why it can't be supported - best case is you get what you deserve, or at least start the ball rolling to identify that a change of policy is merited. If in doubt, or you want some moral support, phone your local CCMS and ask what they think first. They are a great start.

Thanks for your input. I did speak to CCMS. I had a formal meeting with them initially and then exchanged emails related to my grievance. They have been really supportive and believe that I have a reasonable case. What I mean by this is I'm able to reference a policy and have outlined the 5Ws. They obviously didn't say whether I will be successful or not, which I understand. It is case by case.

I ended up submitted an NOI to grieve, so I am hoping that the issue can get sorted at the unit level, but I don't think it will because the redress I am seeking I think needs approval from someone higher than my CO. I'm not sure if I can disclose too much, but that's about it. I reviewed some previous grievances online and I didn't read any that were similar to mine, however there was one that ended up getting the a similar redress to mine, but that was approved by the Minister of National Defence.

 

[AKa]

Good luck @jaysfan17

After almost four decades, the grievances I regret are the ones I didn't submit.

But remember, an 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.

Personally, I consider the three month time limit to be unfair but I'm sure it does reduce the number of grievances received.

 

[jaysfan17]

Good luck @jaysfan17

After almost four decades, the grievances I regret are the ones I didn't submit.

But remember, an 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.

Personally, I consider the three month time limit to be unfair but I'm sure it does reduce the number of grievances received.

That's the thing, I have exceeded the three month limit by three years to be honest, but I wasn't made aware of this particular policy until recently (early Apr). The CCMS said that wouldn't be too much of an issue though given my particular circumstances.

 

[CountDC]

Can't even count the number of times I have tried to get people to submit grievances only to hear the "but it takes too long" . So many don't because they feel there will not be a benefit to them. Guess what folks - even if you don't benefit maybe the people after you will. You know, the JR's you are supposed to be taking care of. Maybe that child of yours that grows up and joins. One of the aspects I started hating about the mess, listening to some drunk complain about how they were wronged but wouldn't do anything about it even when I had already offered to help.

For the OP - 3 years is a long time but if you look through enough grievances at the link you will see that a fair number were pass the time limit and still looked at. Better to ask and get a no than not ask and find out you could have got a yes if you had. Do give the explanation of why it is so late to help with your case and good luck.

 

[Titanicswimteam]

In case this is helpful, my 2 cents about the three month time limit:

a. Yes, the policy states that.
b. If you go beyond that, justify it in your grievance. Explain the reason - the analyst at the first level will absolutely consider your reason. If they do not buy that accepting it after the three month point is in the interests of justice, and weighed against the significance, they will at the very least send you a letter of explanation.
c. At the time of writing this post, the second level of review that I referred to above (the final authority) is accepting grievances that go back years.

There is a real effort being made to right wrongs, rather than gleefully dumping anything over three months. You should definitely aim for three months (it gets more and more difficult to find substantiation as time marches on) but do not let the time limit stop you if you have substantiation and you believe you were aggrieved.