# 2013-112 Pay and Benefits, Administrative Review, Claims Against the Crown, Medical Employment Limitation (MEL), Release - Medical

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2013–12–30

The grievor, a Reservist, was assigned Medical Employment Limitations (MELS) as a result of a type 2 diabetes diagnosis which included the stipulation that he have access to regular meals. An Administrative Review/MEL was initiated and determined that the grievor no longer met the universality of service requirements and therefore was to be released from the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) under Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces, Table to article 15.01, release item 3(b).

In response to being informed of his impending release, the grievor submitted a grievance requesting a review of his MELs. The grievor's medical file was reviewed by the Director Medical Policy (D Med Pol), as the subject matter expert for the CAF. D Med Pol determined that the original MELs assigned were appropriate and consistent with the grievor's condition at the time they were assigned. However, D Med Pol recommended that the grievor's medical status be updated to determine whether he was maintaining good glucose control on medication alone, in which case the MEL requiring regular meals would no longer be needed.

The grievor was then medically reassessed and his MELs were revised, removing the limitation requiring regular meals. The revised MELS were reviewed by the releasing authority in conjunction with the original administrative review and, because the grievor had not yet been released from the CAF, a decision was made that the grievor was to be retained without restrictions.

The grievor then asserted that he had suffered financial prejudice because he was not permitted to serve during a six-month period following the release decision until his MELs were reassessed. He argued that he should not suffer financially because the CAF misinterpreted his medical category. As redress, he sought financial compensation for lost employment.

The Initial Authority (IA) found that the original release decision was justified based on the fact that the grievor's assigned MELs did not meet the universality of service standards at the time of the decision. The IA concluded that there had been no reason to retain the grievor until his MELs were revised such that he once again met the standards of universality of service. The IA also acknowledged that the grievor could not be compensated financially as he had not carried out any military service during the period in question.

The Committee found that the original MELS assigned to the grievor were appropriate at that time and were consistent with those seen by the Committee in previous files addressing the issue of MELS for type 2 diabetes as far back 2000.

The Committee then considered the direction found in Defence Administrative Orders and Directives 5023-1, Minimum Operational Standards Related to Universality of Service, and determined that the grievor's MEL requiring that he have access to regular meals did breach the Minimum Operational Standards and precluded him from deployment. The Committee therefore found that the original decision to medically release the grievor was appropriate.

Finally, the Committee found that the grievor was not unjustly denied employment since he was to be released and for reasons unexplained that did not happen. Regardless of why it did not happen, the Committee noted that it was to the grievor's benefit that he had remained in the CAF long enough to have his MELs reassessed and modified such that he was no longer deemed to be in breach of the Minimum Operational Standards and thus could be retained in the CAF without restriction.

The Committee recommended that the Chief of the Defence Staff deny the grievance.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2014–03–25

The CDS agrees with the Committee's findings and recommendations that the grievance be denied.