Grievance Case Summary - G-739

The Grievor grieved the Respondent’s refusal to grant him an extension of time to sell his house and receive relocation benefits following his retirement. Under the relevant policy, the Grievor had two years from the date of his retirement to sell his house, with the possibility of a one-year extension in exceptional circumstances.

In his Level I grievance, the Grievor argued that his request for an extension of time was justified because the real estate market amounted to an economic situation that he had not anticipated and over which he had no control. He explained that the economy in the region where he lived was precarious, that he had put a lot of effort into selling his house and that despite this, he had been unable to sell it. According to the Grievor, the Respondent did not take these circumstances, which were beyond his control, into consideration when refusing to grant an extension of the applicable time limit. A Level I Adjudicator denied the grievance.

At Level II, the Grievor contends that the Level I Adjudicator denied his grievance based primarily on the fact that he took several months to put his house up for sale. The Grievor submits that the Adjudicator failed to rule on the main ground of his grievance, which was the local economy and the very precarious market that were the primary reasons preventing him from selling his house.

The ERC found that the depressed market associated with a decline in employment in the region where the Grievor lived, along with two purchase offers made to the Grievor that were unsuccessful, constituted a combination of exceptional circumstances. These circumstances justified an extension of the applicable time limit.

The ERC recommended that the grievance be allowed and that the Commissioner order a review of the Grievor’s file to determine the benefits that the Grievor is entitled to in accordance with the relevant policy.

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

[Translation]

The Grievor is a retired member who grieved the denial of an extension of time to sell his house in order to receive relocation benefits following his retirement. In denying the grievance at Level I, the Adjudicator found that the reasons for the Grievor’s request did not fall within the threshold of what is considered exceptional circumstances in the policy. The matter was referred to the RCMP External Review Committee (ERC), which recommended that the grievance be allowed on the basis that the Respondent had misinterpreted the definition of "exceptional circumstances" in the policy. The Commissioner agreed with the ERC and accepted its recommendation, as the reasons were sufficient to meet the definition of exceptional circumstances.