Grievance Case Summary - G-226

This grievance involved the same issues as those raised in G-225. Between August 1993 and January 1996, the Grievor drove from his home to report for his shifts at his detachment. From there, he drove in a police vehicle to the airport, where he completed his duties. After January 1996, when this use of a police vehicle was prohibited by the Appropriate Officer, the Grievor submitted operational travel claims for the additional distance he had to travel to get to the airport in his own car, that is, the difference between the distance from his home to the detachment and his home to the airport (an 18.5 km difference). The claims were denied.

The Grievor grieved the decision denying his travel claims. He indicated that he had understood his worksite to be the detachment and had moved his residence in 1991 so that he would be close to the detachment. As in G-225, the Grievance Advisory Board recommended that the grievance be upheld, while the Level I adjudicator disagreed and denied the grievance.

On April 23, 1999, the ERC issued its findings and recommendations. For the same reasons as those set out in G-225, the Committee concluded that the Grievor was not entitled to reimbursement of travel expenses between the detachment and the airport. Nonetheless, the Committee commented that the matter could have been handled with more sensitivity and diplomacy on the part of the Appropriate Officer. The Committee recommended that the grievance be denied.

On May 30, 1999,the Commissioner rendered his decision in this matter. His decision, as summarized by his office, is as follows:

After considering the information provided, the Commissioner was satisfied that the Grievor's work site was the [airport] not [the detachment]. The grievance was denied and the Grievor was not entitled to reimbursement of travel expenses. The Commissioner commented that the matter could have been handled with more diplomacy.