Grievance Case Summary - G-215

The member requested that he be relocated at Force expense on the basis that, following the move of his section, the distance between his home and his work place had gone from 40 to 50 kilometres. The RCMP refused to grant the member a relocation since no operational need justified it and he had not suffered any prejudice following his section's relocation. The member presented a grievance, stating that a relocation would enable him to be within 40 kilometres of his new work place, in conformity with section 1.1.7 of the Relocation Directive.

The Grievance Advisory Board recommended denying the grievance. The Level I adjudicator denied the grievance, finding that it was not unreasonable to request that the member travel ten additional kilometres to get to his place of work. The member presented his grievance at Level II.

On December 10, 1998, the ERC issued its findings and recommendations. Upon reviewing the file, the External Review Committee was made aware of a change in the member's situation. Since the submission of the grievance, the member had been assigned to a new position, which was located in the same work place where he had been working before his section had been moved. The Committee invited the parties to make additional submissions relative to the impact of this change on the grievance. The Committee also asked the member to state the remedy he sought. The member stated that the dispute was two years old and indicated that he should not be penalized by the fact that he now occupied a different position. Concerning the remedy, the member requested that certain amendments be made to the Relocation Directive.

The Committee found that since the member's work place had changed, the reason for which the member had requested a relocation no longer existed. The Committee also noted that the member was no longer requesting a personal remedy. The Committee therefore recommended to the Commissioner that he deny the grievance since it had become academic.

On January 26, 1999, the Commissioner rendered his decision in this matter. His decision, as summarized by his office is as follows:

The Commissioner agrees with the Committee and finds that the grievance is now academic. He rejects the grievance on the basis of the Committee's findings and the decision in Borowski.