Case # 2010-073

Allowances and Benefits, Civilian Clothing Allowance - Exceptional Cases (CCA-EC), Civilian Dress Assistance Allowance – non-designated positions

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2010–12–13

From 2001 to 2008, the grievor was posted to the Deployment Support Group (DSG) where the chain of command required personnel to wear civilian dress. When he arrived, his superior told him that the chain of command had submitted a request for DSG personnel to receive the Civilian Dress Assistance Allowance (CDAA), which at the time was known as the Civilian Clothing Allowance (CCA). At the time, the grievor’s superiors assured him that the CDAA would be paid to him retroactively. The unit Commanding Officer sent a request to this effect to the Director General Land Staff in 2005. In 2008, the Chief of the Land Staff (CLS) refused the request, on the grounds that the policies issued in 2007 did not allow positions within DSG to be designated for payment of the CDAA. Furthermore, the CLS ordered that all personnel of DSG wear uniform dress. The grievor contested this decision and asked for retroactive payment of the CDAA as promised by his chain of command.

After reviewing Article 205.57 of the Compensation and Benefits Instructions (CBI), including Table A and related information, the acting Director General Compensation and Benefits (DGCB) refused the grievor’s request. The acting DGCB endorsed the CLS’s decision, explaining that the CBIs published in 2007 did not allow for payment of the CDAA to the grievor.

Although it agreed with the acting DGCB’s interpretation of the 2007 CBIs, the Board reviewed the policies that applied from 2001 to 2008. It found that the 2001 and 2004 CBIs gave the Minister of National Defence discretion to designate positions eligible for payment of the CDAA. Since the chain of command had clearly ordered DSG personnel to wear civilian dress, the Board recommended that the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) take the appropriate action vis-à-vis the Minister to have the latter designate the grievor’s position for the purpose of the CDAA at the published rates from 2001 to 2007.

Should the Minister refuse to designate the grievor’s position for service from 2001 to 2007, the Board recommended that the grievor’s file be sent to the Director Claims and Civil Litigation in order to study the possibility of awarding compensation to the grievor, including the period from 2007 to 2008 for which the Minister does not have authority to designate positions for purposes of the CDAA.

The Board also made a systemic recommendation because the evidence in the case revealed that the grievor’s situation was not unique. In fact, the majority of DSG personnel wore civilian dress. Consequently, the Board recommended that the CDS review the overall situation within DSG.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2011–06–01

The CDS disagreed with the Board’s recommendation. The CDS is of the opinion that the grievor’s DSG unit did not meet the criteria for obtaining the CDAA. Given that the grievor had no option but to obey a legitimate order to wear civilian attire, the grievor thereby suffered an injury, as he incurred expenses in purchasing the clothing, but the only recourse available is that the grievor appeal to the DCCL. Indeed, the CDS did not support the corrective measure advocated by the Board, that is, to request that the Minister retroactively designate the grievor’s position so as to grant the CDAA, as the requirements of the policies in force were not met. The CDS did not agree with the Board’s systemic recommendation that the situation of the DSG as regards the CDAA be examined.