RCMP promotion appeal process change

Summary#

This order amends the Commissioner’s Standing Orders (Grievances and Appeals) to change how some promotion-related complaints by RCMP members are handled. It lets members appointed to a rank appeal certain written promotion decisions through the CSO appeal process (one level instead of two), and it adds a definition for standardized test. The instrument was registered on December 5, 2022 and published on December 21, 2022.

What it does#

• Adds a definition of standardized test: a test the Force uses to assess behaviour, knowledge and experience for job-related skills, including its marking scheme, answer key and development materials; the test must be the same for all takers and scored by a set protocol.
• Repeals section 4 of the Standing Orders (the text does not explain the practical effect of removing that section).
• Changes paragraph 37(a) so that a written decision made during a promotion selection process, or about a job requirement for a position (except official languages requirements), can be appealed under Part 3 of the Commissioner’s Standing Orders (Grievances and Appeals).
• Keeps existing grievances (filed before these rules come into force) under the old Part 1 process (transitional provision).
• Comes into force on the day it was registered (December 5, 2022).

Who's affected#

• Members appointed to a rank in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police are the main group affected. They can now appeal certain promotion-related written decisions under the CSO appeal process (single-level adjudication).
• Commissioned members (CMs) are excluded from this change and keep the two-level grievance process under Part 1.
• RCMP staffing, adjudicators and case managers will be affected administratively because fewer files will go through the two-level grievance system.
• The National Police Federation (NPF) was consulted and raised concerns that appeals might be harder to win under the appeal standard.

Why it matters#

• The change aims to speed up and simplify how promotion-related disputes are decided. Moving from two levels of grievance review to a single appeal should reduce backlog and reduce the time members wait for final decisions.
• Fewer adjudication and administrative resources should be needed to handle promotion-related complaints.
• There is a trade-off: the NPF warned the appeal standard (including whether a decision is “clearly unreasonable”) might make it harder for some members to succeed compared with the previous initial-level grievance test. The appeal review still allows consideration of procedural fairness and errors of law.
• The amendment does not change redress rules for official language requirements, does not affect modern treaty obligations with Indigenous peoples, and does not impose costs on small businesses.