Grievance Case Summary - G-726

Between October 2003 and November 2005, the Grievor regularly worked evening shifts outside his headquarters area. While travelling, the Grievor claimed and obtained the reimbursement of meals consumed at mid-shift at the lunch rate. However, further to new information, he requested that the meals already reimbursed at the lunch rate be paid at the dinner rate. He therefore claimed the difference between the amount received and the amount he should have received for 125 meals. The Respondent refused on the ground that the Grievor was entitled to a reimbursement of his meals at the lunch rate pursuant to section 3.2.9 of the Treasury Board Travel Directive (TBTD). The Respondent indicated that if the Grievor had paid a higher amount for his meal, he had to provide supporting documents.

The Level I Adjudicator denied the grievance because according to section 3.2.9 of the TBTD, the Grievor could have his mid-shift meals reimbursed, but based on the sequence of breakfast, lunch and dinner. According to the Level I Adjudicator, the Grievor's mid-shift meal during his evening shifts was therefore the equivalent of lunch. Since the Grievor had already collected the amount to which he was eligible, the Adjudicator denied the grievance.

The ERC found that the TBTD clearly indicated that shift workers should be reimbursed based on the meal sequence of breakfast, lunch and dinner, regardless of the shift's commencement. The ERC concluded that under section 3.2.9 of the TBTD, the meal sequence of breakfast, lunch and dinner was to apply to shift workers' shifts regardless of the shift. The Grievor was therefore eligible for the reimbursement of his meals at the lunch rate.

However, the ERC found that when the Grievor had worked a shift longer than 10 hours, he was eligible for the reimbursement of a second meal at the dinner rate according to the sequence established in the TBTD.

The ERC recommended that the grievance be allowed in part.

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

[Translation]

The Grievor worked shifts for which he then claimed meal expenses. These claims were denied by the Respondent, which led the Grievor to file five grievances. The ERC found that the five grievances should be allowed, but only with respect to the claims involving shifts longer than 10 hours for which the Grievor claimed a second meal. In all the other cases, namely the claims submitted for shifts where the Grievor only claimed one meal, the ERC found that the Grievor was only entitled to the dinner rate, which he seems to have already received. The Commissioner shares the ERC's opinion and accepts the ERC's recommendation that the grievances should be allowed in part.