I'll forward this message as I received it. I've been in contact with the writer since she wrote an opinion article in the Halifax Chronicle Herald newspaper, and I'd call on anyone that feels that they could contribute useful information to Brenda to do so as soon as possible. She intends to send her rebuttal to the Human Rights Tribunal on Monday (October 16). Her e-mail address is listed at the bottom of her message.
I believe Brenda has raised some serious questions, and the issue is one that could affect any CF member who is injured or disabled and faces a medical release - including those that are wounded while deployed.
Please pass on any information/thoughts/opinions directly to Brenda.
(Mods/Admins - any chance this could get a link from the front page for the next few days?)
Dear Soldiers, Veterans, and all interested Canadians,
I am currently advocating for and assisting a Veteran in a Human Rights Commission case. The veteran (a soldier released after 17 years of exemplary service following a knee injury) is asking the Department of National Defence (DND) to step up and offer him job security.
The arguments for the case:
1) That DND must employ CF soldiers that can no longer meet the physical standards required in the CF.
2) That DND must step up to guarantee job security and employment opportunities for injured CF soldiers for at least the duration of the employment contract that the soldier signed with that organization.
You might be asking why is there a requirement for DND to guarantee job security and employment opportunities to those members of the CF who are injured and no longer able to remain in the CF. The Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) guarantees that Canadians are not discriminated against on the basis of disability. An employer has an obligation under the CHRA to accommodate a disabled employee to the limits of undue financial hardship or safety concerns to the employee or co-workers. This means that an employer cannot dismiss an employee if the employee’s needs can be reasonably accommodated. The CHRA permits the CF to release members who no longer meet the minimum medical requirements for service in the CF due to disability, using the bona fide operational requirement provisions of the CHRA. However, one question remains – Who is the employer of a CF member?
The investigation phase of this case has been completed and, in a letter recently received by the veteran, the respondent (DND) states, "there is no room for argument; a Canadian Forces member is not an employee of DND. Therefore, DND cannot be construed as the organization to discharge the obligations of an employer with respect to (soldier’s name)”.
This letter was sent despite the fact that the veteran provided, as proof of an employment link to DND, his employment contracts (on DND letterhead and forms) and the Record of Employment that he received upon release listing the Department of National Defence as his employer for the last seventeen years.
The Commission has given us until the 20th of October to respond to DND's letter and offer arguments in this case.
Unable to afford legal counsel, we are in this fight alone. We are asking soldiers, veterans, and the public for help.
Please look in your records, find your contracts and Records of Employment and any other documentation you can find that might help to make DND acknowledge it has a responsibility towards soldiers.
Also important are your thoughts on the above quotation taken from the letter sent to this veteran.
Part of our fight will be to address the misleading information and legalese that DND is currently hiding behind.
Do CF soldiers work for DND?
If you are currently a soldier or veteran, does it bother you to know that DND denies any employment relationship with you?
Were you, upon recruitment, ever informed of the CF's employment status? Did you know that you are considered employees of the crown but have no employment link to DND? The Minister of National Defence is your ultimate boss, but DND is separate and distinct from the CF?
DND is hiding behind archaic legislation and confusing bureaucratese.
We want, at the very least, to show them that their legal victory is in no way a moral or ethical one.
In our rebuttal, we would like to offer as many letters in support of our fight as we can.
We ask your help to do this.
Throughout this letter, I have said "we" many times. I speak in this way because the veteran in question is my husband - and we are definitely in this together.
Some of you may have heard of me before - I am a former military nurse fighting hard to influence change in current DND/CF employment equity policy - with a focus on ensuring our injured soldiers are never out searching for jobs.
I will accept any and all help and information that you can provide at soldieradvocacy@eastlink.ca.
Please remember our deadline: Friday, October 20, 2006.
Thank you,
Brenda MacDonald
I believe Brenda has raised some serious questions, and the issue is one that could affect any CF member who is injured or disabled and faces a medical release - including those that are wounded while deployed.
Please pass on any information/thoughts/opinions directly to Brenda.
(Mods/Admins - any chance this could get a link from the front page for the next few days?)
Dear Soldiers, Veterans, and all interested Canadians,
I am currently advocating for and assisting a Veteran in a Human Rights Commission case. The veteran (a soldier released after 17 years of exemplary service following a knee injury) is asking the Department of National Defence (DND) to step up and offer him job security.
The arguments for the case:
1) That DND must employ CF soldiers that can no longer meet the physical standards required in the CF.
2) That DND must step up to guarantee job security and employment opportunities for injured CF soldiers for at least the duration of the employment contract that the soldier signed with that organization.
You might be asking why is there a requirement for DND to guarantee job security and employment opportunities to those members of the CF who are injured and no longer able to remain in the CF. The Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) guarantees that Canadians are not discriminated against on the basis of disability. An employer has an obligation under the CHRA to accommodate a disabled employee to the limits of undue financial hardship or safety concerns to the employee or co-workers. This means that an employer cannot dismiss an employee if the employee’s needs can be reasonably accommodated. The CHRA permits the CF to release members who no longer meet the minimum medical requirements for service in the CF due to disability, using the bona fide operational requirement provisions of the CHRA. However, one question remains – Who is the employer of a CF member?
The investigation phase of this case has been completed and, in a letter recently received by the veteran, the respondent (DND) states, "there is no room for argument; a Canadian Forces member is not an employee of DND. Therefore, DND cannot be construed as the organization to discharge the obligations of an employer with respect to (soldier’s name)”.
This letter was sent despite the fact that the veteran provided, as proof of an employment link to DND, his employment contracts (on DND letterhead and forms) and the Record of Employment that he received upon release listing the Department of National Defence as his employer for the last seventeen years.
The Commission has given us until the 20th of October to respond to DND's letter and offer arguments in this case.
Unable to afford legal counsel, we are in this fight alone. We are asking soldiers, veterans, and the public for help.
Please look in your records, find your contracts and Records of Employment and any other documentation you can find that might help to make DND acknowledge it has a responsibility towards soldiers.
Also important are your thoughts on the above quotation taken from the letter sent to this veteran.
Part of our fight will be to address the misleading information and legalese that DND is currently hiding behind.
Do CF soldiers work for DND?
If you are currently a soldier or veteran, does it bother you to know that DND denies any employment relationship with you?
Were you, upon recruitment, ever informed of the CF's employment status? Did you know that you are considered employees of the crown but have no employment link to DND? The Minister of National Defence is your ultimate boss, but DND is separate and distinct from the CF?
DND is hiding behind archaic legislation and confusing bureaucratese.
We want, at the very least, to show them that their legal victory is in no way a moral or ethical one.
In our rebuttal, we would like to offer as many letters in support of our fight as we can.
We ask your help to do this.
Throughout this letter, I have said "we" many times. I speak in this way because the veteran in question is my husband - and we are definitely in this together.
Some of you may have heard of me before - I am a former military nurse fighting hard to influence change in current DND/CF employment equity policy - with a focus on ensuring our injured soldiers are never out searching for jobs.
I will accept any and all help and information that you can provide at soldieradvocacy@eastlink.ca.
Please remember our deadline: Friday, October 20, 2006.
Thank you,
Brenda MacDonald