Grievance Case Summary - G-274

The grievance concerned the Force's decision to reject an expense claim presented by the Grievor for meals and private accommodation. In 1998, the Grievor was the detachment commander in Hopedale, Labrador. Chronic back problems resulted in a determination being made that he required surgery. Since the medical services needed were not available in the Grievor's community, the Force authorized him to travel to St. John's, Newfoundland for that purpose. The Force agreed to pay the cost of relocating the Grievor and his family to a residence that they owned in the vicinity of St. John's. This included paying the cost of moving their household effects. It was indicated to the Grievor at the time that, because the Force was paying relocation expenses, he would not be considered on travel status during the period that he would be undergoing medical attention and would therefore not be receiving a composite meal allowance. Nonetheless, the Grievor later submitted a claim for such an allowance covering a three-week period. The Force refused to pay that claim.

The Grievor challenged the rejection of his claim on the grounds that he had been on travel status. To support his argument, the Grievor pointed to the fact that he had continued to be considered as posted to Hopedale Detachment and was absent from his permanent work site to receive medical attention, therefore falling within the definition of "travel status" as indicated by the Force's Administration Manual.

On September 27, 2002, the ERC has issued its findings and recommendations. In coming to its conclusions, the Committee pointed out that the Grievor could not have been considered on travel status during the period of his medical treatment because he and his family had been relocated to the St. John's area before the treatment began. As a result, he was not entitled to claim any travel expenses for that period. While the Grievor is correct to point out that his workplace remained at Hopedale Detachment throughout the period of his medical treatment, it is the location of his residence rather than that of his workplace which serves to determine if he was on travel status. Accordingly, the Committee recommended that the grievance be denied.

On November 8, 2002, the Acting Commissioner rendered his decision in this matter, summarized as follows:

The Acting Commissioner agreed with the recommendations of the Committee and denied the grievance. He remarked that the grievor's arguments were "remarkable in their absence" and that the decision to relocate the grievor was "a practical, humanitarian, and considerate one."