Grievance Case Summary - G-2812

The grievance pertains to a decision rejecting the Grievor's request to be provided with legal representation at public expense. A private citizen attended at the local RCMP Detachment, bringing with him stereo equipment which he indicated to have recently come into the possession of his teenage son and which he was concerned may have been stolen. He left the stereo equipment at the detachment. He called the detachment several weeks later and enquired about the stereo equipment. The exhibit custodian was unable to locate the equipment and found no record of its receipt. He claimed that the Grievor told him that he had put the equipment in the detachment dumpster, after having determined that it had not been stolen, because it appeared to be worthless. Upon learning that he was under criminal investigation, the Grievor applied to be provided with legal counsel at public expense. The Officer in charge of Administration and Personnel (the "Respondent") sought an opinion from the Department of Justice which advised that the application complied with all of the requirements established by the applicable Treasury Board policy. Accordingly, the Respondent approved the Grievor's application but only for the purposes of the criminal investigation. In the end, no criminal charges were laid but the Grievor was disciplined, although he disputed the exhibit custodian's assertion that he had discarded the stereo equipment. The Grievor was also ordered by the Respondent to pay to the Receiver General of Canada an amount of $567.04, representing the purchase price of the stereo equipment which the Force reimbursed to the owner. The Grievor challenged the payment demand through the grievance process and made a new application for legal representation at public expense because the Respondent had threatened to commence a civil action unless payment was received within 30 days. That application was rejected by the Respondent, without consulting the Department of Justice, because he considered that the Grievor had acted beyond the scope of his duties by failing to comply with Force policy on the handling of exhibits. The Grievor maintained that he had not discarded the stereo equipment and that the Respondent violated Treasury Board policy by not consulting the Department of Justice.

The decision to deny legal representation can be justified by the fact that the threat of civil action ceased to be imminent when the payment demand was grieved, the Respondent had little choice but to suspend any consideration of taking legal action against the Grievor until his grievance against the payment demand had been adjudicated. The Treasury Board policy only required consultation with the Department of Justice if the Respondent had intended to approve the Grievor's application. The contention that the Grievor acted beyond the scope of his duties does not appear to be adequately supported by the evidence.

The grievance should be denied.

The Commissioner agreed with the findings and recommendations of the Committee. He denied the grievance.