GRIEVANCES ARE YOUR (ONLY) VOICE!!!!
This page serves as a general information resource for Canadian Armed Forces grievances. It is intended to help members better understand the grievance process, relevant policies, timelines, and common procedural issues.
All information provided is general information only, based on applicable policy, regulation, or law as available at the time of writing and to the best of the author’s knowledge. This content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice, nor is it a replacement for advice from a qualified legal professional. As I am not legally permitted to provide legal advice, members are encouraged to seek appropriate professional legal advice when required.
No warranties or guarantees are made regarding the accuracy, completeness, or current applicability of the information provided. Policies, interpretations, and practices may change, and information may be outdated or applied differently in specific circumstances.
Failing to challenge administrative wrongs through the grievance process allows those wrongs to persist. When members do not grieve improper decisions, procedural failures, or policy violations, those practices become normalized and perpetuated within the system. Grievances are one of the few mechanisms available to formally document and challenge administrative failure.
If you have a grievance-related question or are unsure how the process applies to your situation, you may contact me for individualized general information and experience-based insight. While I cannot tell you what you should do, I can explain how I would personally approach a similar situation, what policies or processes I would look at, and what procedural issues I would be mindful of — for general informational purposes only, not legal advice or legal representation.
The CAF grievance system is widely recognized as slow, inconsistent, and often ineffective in delivering timely decisions.
I am fully aware of these shortcomings. I currently have a grievance that has been outstanding for approximately five years, and I am aware of other cases where grievances have remained unresolved for nearly two decades (https://roryfowlerlaw.com/incompetence-intransigence-in-grievance-adjudication-part-i/).
Members should understand that submitting a grievance does not guarantee a timely resolution, meaningful relief, or any resolution at all. However, the existence of systemic delay does not negate the importance of grieving administrative wrongs. In many cases, the grievance process remains the only formal mechanism available to document issues, preserve rights, and challenge improper decisions.
This platform does not suggest that the grievance system functions effectively or efficiently (in fact it is well known that it is entirely the opposite). It exists to help members navigate the system as it actually operates, not as it is described in policy or briefings. While individual grievances may stall or fail to resolve, the consistent use of the grievance system is one of the few ways systemic administrative failures are made visible. When issues are formally recorded rather than quietly absorbed, patterns emerge that cannot be ignored or dismissed.
A grievance is a formal mechanism that allows a CAF member to challenge a decision, act, or omission that they believe has adversely affected them. It is one of the few processes available to members to seek review, correction, or redress when administrative decisions are unfair, incorrect, inconsistent, or improperly applied.
Grievances are not limited to major career-ending decisions. They can apply to any matter that negatively affects a member, including pay, postings, evaluations, leave, administrative action, procedural fairness issues, and failures to follow policy.
A grievance is not about punishment or retaliation — it is about challenging a decision or process and placing the issue formally on the record.
A Notice of Intent (NOI) is not a mandatory step in the grievance process. Members are not required to submit an NOI before filing a grievance, and choosing not to do so does not prejudice their right to grieve. Importantly, submitting an NOI does not pause, extend, or otherwise alter the prescribed grievance timelines.
Members should also be aware of the practical limitations of an NOI. An NOI is only meaningful where the Commanding Officer (CO) has the actual authority to grant the relief being sought. If the issue involves policy established above the unit level, decisions made by higher authority, or matters outside the CO’s power to change, an NOI may be procedurally ineffective. In such cases, reliance on an NOI or other informal resolution efforts may create a false sense of protection while grievance timelines continue to run.
Members are therefore cautioned against delaying the submission of a grievance based on informal processes where decision-making authority does not exist. While informal resolution may be appropriate in limited circumstances, it should not be relied upon as a safeguard against statutory timelines.
Many members avoid submitting grievances because they believe:
the issue is “too small”
nothing will change
it will make things worse
it isn’t worth the effort
In reality, grievances serve several important purposes:
They formally document issues that might otherwise be ignored
They create an official record when informal resolution fails
They can correct errors before damage becomes permanent
They preserve timelines and rights
They expose systemic or repeated administrative failures
Even when a grievance does not result in immediate relief, it can still matter — especially where patterns, precedent, or future decisions are involved.
If an issue affects you, it is not too minor to grieve. When in doubt GRIEVE!
Grievances are subject to strict timelines. Missing a deadline can result in a grievance being rejected without consideration of the merits.
Timelines typically begin when:
you are notified of a decision, or
you reasonably become aware of the decision or omission
Waiting for informal resolution, assurances, or “we’ll look into it” does not stop the clock unless explicitly confirmed in writing.
Submitting a grievance on time protects your position, even if discussions are ongoing.
Members are often encouraged or required to attempt informal resolution before submitting a grievance. This may include submitting a Notice of Intent (NOI).
An NOI is intended to:
notify the chain of command of a concern
give the Commanding Officer (CO) an opportunity to resolve the issue
potentially avoid the need for a formal grievance
Small administrative issues often become big ones when left unchallenged.
Examples include:
incorrect pay or allowances
inaccurate personnel records
flawed evaluations
procedural shortcuts
informal decisions that later become formal consequences
Grieving early:
prevents issues from being normalized
preserves evidence while it still exists
establishes a record of concern
protects you if the issue escalates later
holds the organization and superiors accountable
A grievance does not have to be aggressive or hostile. It can be factual, professional, and focused on correction.