Frequently Asked Questions About CAF Grievances

Q: Who can file a grievance in the Canadian Armed Forces?

A: Any current CAF member (Regular Force or Reserve) who has been aggrieved by a decision, act, or omission in the administration of the affairs of the Canadian Armed Forces can file a grievance. This includes officers and non-commissioned members of all ranks. Civilian employees of DND cannot use the military grievance system but have other recourse mechanisms available.

Q: What can and cannot be grieved?

A: You CAN grieve:

• Administrative decisions affecting your service (postings, career decisions)
• Disciplinary or administrative actions (remedial measures, recorded warnings)
• Pay and benefits issues
• Leave denials
• Release decisions
• Medical employment limitations
• Harassment complaint outcomes

You CANNOT grieve:

• Recommendations (must wait for actual decision)
• Government policies or CAF-wide regulations
• Decisions made under the Code of Service Discipline
• Matters already subject to another redress mechanism
• Operational decisions during combat operations

Q: How long do I have to file a grievance?

A: You must submit your grievance within 3 months (90 days) from the date you knew or reasonably ought to have known about the decision, act, or omission you're grieving. The clock starts when you become aware of the issue, not when it occurred. Extensions may be granted if you can demonstrate compelling circumstances that prevented timely filing, such as:

• Deployment or operational commitments
• Medical issues or hospitalization
• Lack of access to resources or support
• Ongoing attempts at informal resolution

Request extensions in writing with supporting documentation before the deadline expires when possible.

Q: Can I file a grievance if I'm released or retiring?

A: Yes, but with limitations. You can file a grievance about matters that occurred while you were serving, as long as you submit it before your release date. Once released, you cannot initiate new grievances, but any grievances already in the system will continue to be processed. If you're facing release and have grievable issues, file immediately - don't wait.

Q: Do I need to try informal resolution first?

A: While not legally required, attempting informal resolution is strongly encouraged and often more effective. CAF policy (particularly DAOD 2017-1 and CDS Directive on Conflict Management) emphasizes resolving issues at the lowest appropriate level. Benefits of trying informal resolution include:

• Faster resolution (days/weeks vs months/years)
• Less adversarial process
• Preserves working relationships
• Can be tailored to specific needs

Document your informal resolution attempts, as this strengthens your grievance if formal action becomes necessary.

Q: Should I send a Notice of Intent to Grieve?

A: Yes, sending a Notice of Intent (NOI) is highly recommended though not mandatory. The NOI serves several important purposes:

• Formally notifies your chain of command about the issue
• May prompt early resolution before formal grievance
• Demonstrates good faith effort to resolve
• Preserves your timeline while attempting resolution
• Creates a paper trail of the issue

Send the NOI as soon as you identify a grievable issue, ideally within the first month of the 3-month window. Keep it brief - state the issue, that you intend to grieve if not resolved, and your openness to discussion.

Q: How do I use the 2024 Digital Grievance Form?

A: The digital grievance submission system launched in 2024 streamlines the process:

1. Access: Log in through DWAN or approved external access portal
2. Complete fields: Fill all mandatory fields marked with asterisks
3. Attach documents: Upload supporting evidence in PDF format (max 25MB total)
4. Review: Use the preview function to check your submission
5. Submit: Click submit and save your confirmation number
6. Track: Use the tracking system to monitor progress

Common issues include browser compatibility (use Chrome or Edge), file size limits, and session timeouts. Save your work frequently and consider drafting complex grievances offline first.

Q: Who decides my grievance at each level?

A: The grievance system has two levels:

Initial Authority (IA): Usually your Commanding Officer, unless they:

• Made the decision being grieved
• Have a conflict of interest
• Lack authority over the matter

In these cases, the next higher commander becomes the IA.

Final Authority (FA): The Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) is the FA for all grievances, but typically delegates to:

• Director General Canadian Forces Grievance Authority (DGCFGA) for most grievances
• Vice Chief of Defence Staff for senior officer grievances
• CDS personally for exceptional cases

Q: What happens after I submit my grievance?

A: The typical process follows these steps:

1. Registration (1-2 weeks): Grievance logged and assigned file number
2. Disclosure (2-4 weeks): You receive copies of relevant documents
3. Analysis (2-6 months): Analyst reviews and prepares recommendation
4. Decision (1-2 months): IA reviews and makes decision
5. Notification: You receive written decision with reasons

Total timeline at Initial Authority: 4-12 months typically. You can submit to Final Authority if unsatisfied, which takes another 12-24 months on average.

Q: Can I withdraw my grievance?

A: Yes, you can withdraw at any time by submitting a written request. Consider withdrawal if:

• The issue has been resolved to your satisfaction
• Circumstances have changed making it moot
• You've received acceptable alternate redress

Important: Once withdrawn, you cannot reinstate the same grievance unless exceptional circumstances exist. Think carefully before withdrawing, and consider requesting suspension instead if you're negotiating resolution.

Q: What does "upheld," "partially upheld," and "denied" mean?

A: These terms describe the decision outcome:

Upheld: Your grievance is accepted as valid. The decision-maker agrees you were wronged and grants some or all requested redress.

Partially Upheld: Some aspects of your grievance are valid while others are not. You may receive partial redress or modified remedy.

Denied (Not Upheld): The decision-maker finds no merit in your grievance. The original decision stands.

Withdrawn/Resolved: You've withdrawn the grievance or it's been resolved through other means.

Note that even if upheld, you may not receive exactly what you requested if the decision-maker determines alternate redress is more appropriate.

Q: What redress can I realistically expect?

A: Realistic redress depends on the grievance type but may include:

Common remedies granted:

• Correction of records or documents
• Removal of adverse entries
• Reconsideration of decisions
• Financial compensation for losses
• Apologies or acknowledgments
• Policy clarification or change
• Retroactive promotions or benefits

Unrealistic requests rarely granted:

• Disciplinary action against others
• Specific postings or positions
• Compensation for stress or suffering
• Changes to CAF-wide policy
• Reversal of lawful orders

Q: What is a de novo review?

A: A de novo review is a "fresh look" at your grievance without relying on previous flawed decisions. It's used when procedural fairness errors occurred in the original decision. The reviewing authority:

• Acknowledges the procedural error
• Sets aside the flawed decision
• Reviews all evidence independently
• Makes a new decision following proper procedures

This approach, accepted by Federal Courts, cures procedural defects while still addressing the substantive issues. However, the outcome may still be the same if the facts support the original action.

Q: What burden of proof applies to grievances?

A: Grievances use the civil standard of "balance of probabilities" (50% + 1), not the criminal standard of "beyond reasonable doubt." This means:

• The decision-maker asks: "Is this more likely true than not?"
• You need to show your version is probable, not certain
• Evidence is weighed, not proven absolutely
• Reasonable doubt isn't required to uphold a grievance

This lower standard recognizes that administrative decisions affect careers and welfare but not criminal liability.

Q: What is MGERC and when does it review grievances?

A: The Military Grievances External Review Committee (MGERC), formerly the Canadian Forces Grievance Board, is an independent civilian body that reviews certain grievances before the Final Authority decides. MGERC must review grievances involving:

• Administrative action resulting in release or demotion
• Application or interpretation of policies on harassment, discrimination, or racism
• Pay, allowances, and financial benefits
• Entitlement to medical or dental care

MGERC provides findings and recommendations to both you and the Final Authority. While not binding, their recommendations carry significant weight and require justification if not followed.

Q: Can I seek judicial review if my grievance is denied?

A: Yes, after exhausting the grievance process (both Initial and Final Authority levels), you can apply to the Federal Court for judicial review. The court reviews whether:

• The decision was reasonable
• Procedural fairness was followed
• The decision-maker had proper authority
• Relevant factors were considered

You have 30 days from receiving the Final Authority decision to file. Legal representation is strongly advised for judicial review. Note that the court typically won't re-decide your case but may send it back for reconsideration if errors are found.

Q: What role does the Ombudsman play?

A: The DND/CAF Ombudsman provides independent, impartial assistance but isn't part of the formal grievance process. The Ombudsman can:

• Provide information and guidance
• Facilitate communication with authorities
• Investigate systemic issues
• Make recommendations for fair resolution
• Report on trends and problems

Contact the Ombudsman when facing undue delays, systemic barriers, or if you believe the grievance process isn't working fairly. They cannot overturn decisions but can advocate for fairness and proper process.

Q: What are the most common mistakes to avoid?

A: Common mistakes that weaken grievances include:

• Missing deadlines: File within 3 months or request extensions immediately
• Emotional arguments: Focus on facts and policy, not feelings
• Kitchen sink approach: Don't include every complaint; focus on grievable issues
• Lack of evidence: Document everything and attach supporting materials
• Unrealistic redress: Request reasonable, achievable remedies
• Ignoring procedures: Follow proper channels and formats
• Going alone: Seek help from grievance officers or CFGA

Q: How should I organize my grievance submission?

A: A well-organized grievance follows this structure:

1. Clear statement of grievance: What decision/act/omission you're grieving
2. Timeline of events: Chronological facts with dates
3. Issues/Contentions: Numbered list of specific problems
4. Supporting arguments: Policy violations, precedents, evidence
5. Redress sought: Specific, reasonable remedies requested
6. Attachments: All supporting documents, properly labeled

Use clear headings, paragraph numbers, and avoid emotional language. Aim for 2-5 pages of main text with unlimited attachments.

Q: Should I cite specific regulations and policies?

A: Yes, absolutely. Strong grievances reference:

• Specific QR&O articles violated
• Relevant DAODs and CFAOs
• CANFORGENs or unit policies
• Precedent decisions or case law
• Treasury Board directives if applicable

Don't just name policies - explain how they were violated or misapplied. Quote relevant sections and connect them to your specific situation. This shows you understand the framework and strengthens your arguments.

Q: What if I need help but can't afford a lawyer?

A: Many free resources are available:

• CFGA Helpline: 1-866-474-3867 for guidance
• Unit Grievance Officers: Trained to assist with submissions
• CCMS: Conflict and Complaint Management Services
• Base Legal Office: May provide general guidance
• Veterans organizations: Often have experience with grievances
• Online resources: MGERC case summaries, policy databases

Most grievances don't require lawyers. The system is designed for self-representation with available support.