Grievance Case Summary - G-478

The Grievor, who suffered from back pain, could not reside at his home post with his common law spouse, partly because the Force possessed limited property there. The Force temporarily transferred him to a unit closer to his house. It later ordered him back to his home post even though he had been there for far longer than what was advised. The Grievor told an Assistant Commissioner (A/Commr.) that he could return if the Force gave him a car and paid some of his costs. The A/ Commr. said he found it "annoying" that the Grievor disregarded the chain of command, yet he sought a review of the Grievor's proposals. The Grievor returned to the home post, on light duty. He asked for a permanent transfer, which the Respondent refused to support. According to the Respondent, a policy barred the permanent transfer of members on medically restricted duties.

The Grievor grieved his return to the home post. He urged that the Force discriminated against him on the basis of marital status and disability, and that it owed him allowances for temporary transfers. The Level I Adjudicator was the A/Commr. who called the Grievor's choice to contact him "annoying". He allowed the grievance in part. He directed the Force to pay the Grievor certain travel costs. He claimed the redress would take effect if the decision was not appealed. The Grievor submitted a Level II grievance. He repeated his arguments, and added new ones.

The ERC decided that it could not review requests for allowances for temporary transfers, as they were governed by an internal Force Manual which it did not have legal authority to address. It also found that the Level I decision was not tainted by perceived bias. Although the Level I Adjudicator labelled the Grievor's actions "annoying" in his capacity as A/Commr., he ultimately acted in a way which would not lead a reasonably informed person to reasonably infer bias. The ERC further found that redress was crafted in accordance with Force policy. It concluded that the scope of the merits was restricted to the decision to end the Grievor's temporary transfer and return him to his home post and to human rights issues.

The ERC noted that it was unfortunate that a solution was not found sooner to the situation of the Grievor having to deal so long with a post with scarce lodging. However, it could not reasonably find that the situation gave rise to marital status discrimination. The ERC then concluded that the Force discriminated against the Grievor regarding his medical limits. The Respondent refused to support the Grievor's request for a transfer because he said there was a policy which prevented the permanent transfer of members on medically restricted duties. Any such policy was inconsistent with Canadian human rights law. It allowed the Force to avoid permanently transferring the Grievor, if he had a disability, without first trying to accommodate him up to the point of undue hardship.

The ERC recommended that the Commissioner of the RCMP allow the grievance in part. It also recommended that he endorse the Level I direction that the Grievor be paid certain travel expenses. It further recommended that the Commissioner apologize to the Grievor for specific actions by the Force which were inconsistent with Canadian human rights law.

The Grievor withdrew the grievance before the Commissioner had an opportunity to render his decision.