Grievance Case Summary - G-667

This grievance is a joint grievance filed by two members of the same team. From May 18-20, 2010, the Grievors attended a training session for their team, which was a 5-hour drive from their detachment. The Grievor was an instructor for this training session. The Grievors, in order to be at the training on May 18 at 08:30, departed the day before the training started.

Prior to departing, the Grievor called the Respondent in order to request the use of a rental vehicle, which was authorized by the Respondent. During this same call, the Grievor informed the Respondent that both he and the other Grievor would be travelling together and he would try to convince the other Grievor to depart a day early. The crux of the grievance is whether the Grievors were pre-authorized to depart the day before the training. According to the Grievors, the Respondent did not deny their departure a day early. However, according to the Respondent, he did not pre-authorize the Grievors to depart on May 17, 2010.

During the ER phase, the issue of the provision of documents came up. Both parties provided their views on the issue and a Level I adjudicator's decision was sought. The Adjudicator ordered the Respondent to provide the Grievors with a copy of the policies on which he based his decision. After much correspondence, the Grievors requested another decision from the Level I Adjudicator for "non-provision of ordered materials". In a second decision, the Level I Adjudicator found that the Respondent had provided all that he was obliged to.

The Level I Adjudicator denied the grievance as the Grievors did not have a written pre-authorization as per the Treasury Board Travel Directive to depart a day before the start of the training.

The ERC found that the Grievors are not entitled to the reimbursement of the expenses incurred on May 17, 2010 as the travel policies governing the matter expressly required that pre-authorization be granted in order to be reimbursed for travel benefits. The Grievors did not obtain pre-authorization for the first day of travel. The ERC further found that the fact the Grievor, and other members, received reimbursement for previous travel expenses that were not pre-approved as per policy is irrelevant as this grievance does not relate to whether or not the Grievor and other members were wrongly reimbursed expenses to which they were not entitled to.

The ERC recommended that the grievance be denied.

The Commissioner's decision, as summarized by her office, is as follows:

In this joint grievance, the Grievors challenged the Respondent's decision to partially deny their expense claim for travel the day before mandatory training. The Level I Adjudicator denied the grievance. The ERC recommended the grievance be denied on the basis that the Grievors failed to obtain written pre-authorization to travel early. The Commissioner finds that the Grievors had authorization to travel for the mandatory training and the Respondent could not readily preclude them from travelling a day early pursuant to the National Joint Council Travel Directive because of the driving distance involved. The Grievance is allowed.