# 2020-148 Careers, Cease-Training , Pilot, Progress Review Board

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2021–07–21

During the Basic Airborne Electronic Sensor Operator (AES Op) course, the grievor twice met the criteria for course failure. In both instances, progress review boards (PRB) were convened; both PRB recommended removing the grievor from training. The grievor's commanding officer (CO) rejected the first PRB's cease-training recommendation and allowed the grievor to continue on course. However, the CO accepted the recommendation of the second PRB. The grievor grieved the CO's decision to remove him from training following the second PRB.

The Initial Authority (IA) determined that the PRB recommendation and the CO's decision to remove the grievor from training were reasonable, and that both PRB were conducted in accordance with the relevant policies. While the second PRB incorrectly reported the grievor's academic average, the IA found that this discrepancy had no bearing on the outcome.

The Committee found that the PRB recommendations were reasonable in the circumstances, and that the CO's decision to accept the second PRB's cease-training recommendation was also reasonable. The Committee also concluded that the grievor was afforded procedural fairness: the PRB's failure to interview certain instructors was not unfair in the circumstances, nor did any unfairness arise from allegedly undue delay. 

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority (FA) not afford the grievor redress. 

FA Decision Summary

The Director Canadian Forces Grievance Authority, acting as FA, agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation not to afford the grievor redress.