# 2021-257 Careers, Initial Counselling, Remedial Measures

Case summary

F&R Date: 2023-02-01

The grievor contested the Initial Counseling (IC) issued by the chain of command (CoC) related to a post on social media and comments expressed during a unit merit board, which she thought was based on a subjective interpretation from being the respondent in ongoing harassment investigations, rather than an objective review of the evidence. The grievor further argued that her comments during the merit board were appropriate and within her role and responsibilities.

The Initial Authority (IA) denied the grievor redress stating that while the social media post was nonspecific and would likely not have brought discredit to the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF), the post was accessible to the grievor's subordinates and was potentially referring to recent events at the unit causing them distress and in breach of policies. The IA also determined that it was reasonable to perceive the grievor as having used their position during the merit board as retribution against a complainant in a harassment investigation.

The Committee found that the responsibility to avoid the perception of reprisals against complainants in the unit lied equally with the CoC who should have recused the grievor during the merit board while the complainant case was being discussed. The Committee also found that the grievor acted within their role at the merit board. The Committee noted the lack of record keeping during an investigation on the social media post and following a review of the submissions made by the grievor, the CoC, and the IA, found that it would be unreasonable to conclude that the post made by the grievor was related to the events from the merit board or the CAF in general. As such, the Committee found that the IC was not based on reliable evidence, and recommended that the Final Authority quash the IC and have any reference to it removed from the grievor's personnel file.