Use them to explain the temporary arrangement and the applicant’s actual responsibilities, without attributing the replacement’s decisions to the applicant.
Preserve who exercised authority and when
Include the leave approval, delegation record, relevant organization charts and return arrangement where available. Explain whether responsibilities resumed unchanged or were redesigned. Select evidence of the applicant’s own qualifying work before and after the absence.
An unsigned retrospective chart should not be presented as a contemporaneous decision, and a title retained during leave does not alone establish work actually performed. Hypothetical example: A Trois-Rivières industrial water-treatment company regional director returns from leave to a role with a new reporting line. Collect the leave approval, payroll record, before-and-after organization charts, delegation documents and the decision that created the revised role.
A first review should state which document proves dates, which demonstrates actual authority and which merely describes a future plan. The decisive issue is not whether the title stayed impressive but whether the applicant performed and will perform qualifying managerial or executive work. Do not backdate a chart or ask a colleague to describe responsibilities never exercised.
Sequence the evidence chronologically, identify the operational staff who carry out routine work, and explain the redesign honestly. That approach reveals whether the file needs more current operating proof rather than more polished wording.