G-760 - Travel

The Grievor was posted to Detachment A. He was involved in a matter with his former spouse who was also a regular member of the RCMP at Detachment A. That matter resulted in the Grievor’s arrest and the laying of charges, after which the Grievor was released.

Following the incident, the Grievor went off-duty sick (ODS). While ODS, he moved out of the matrimonial home near Detachment A, and took up residence with family in another locality within the Division. The Grievor remained ODS for nearly a month after the incident.

Subsequently, the Grievor advised the then Officer in Charge (OIC) that he was feeling better and was ready to come back to work. Since a return to Detachment A was not an option given the presence of the Grievor’s former spouse, the OIC proposed to the Grievor that he report for work at a unit near the location where he had taken residence. The Grievor worked at that unit for approximately three weeks (first secondment).

The Grievor was then transferred temporarily to another unit (second secondment) where he worked for a period of three months. A Transfer Notice (form A-22A) indicating a “no cost move (secondment)” was issued.

During the second secondment, the Grievor ceased living with family and rented an apartment.

In response to a shortage of resources identified at Detachment B, the Grievor was seconded to a general duty position at that detachment following the second secondment. A form A-22A indicating a “no cost – temp secondment” was issued to this effect. The Grievor’s secondment with Detachment B lasted for approximately five months after which he was issued a form A-22A indicating a “no cost” transfer to a permanent position at Detachment B.

A few months later, the Grievor submitted three expense claims (form 1393) to the Respondent requesting compensation for travel expenses incurred during his three secondments. The total for the three claims amounted to $28,536.23.

The Respondent denied the Grievor’s expense claims and the Grievor filed a grievance challenging this decision.

A Level I Adjudicator denied the grievance on the basis that the Grievor failed to have his claims for travel status pre-approved prior to the commencement of the first secondment. 

The ERC concluded that while the Grievor failed to meet the “pre-authorization” and “government business” requirements under the RCMP Travel Directive (AM VI.1), he was nevertheless in travel status during the period covered by his secondments. More specifically, in relying on section 4.8.2 of the AM VI.1 and section G.1.e.2 of the RCMP Career Management Manual, Chapter 3 (CMM 3) which both provided that a member will be considered in travel status if his or her temporary workplace is located outside his or her headquarters area, the ERC determined that the Grievor was in travel status as a result of the RCMP’s decision to transfer him without permanently changing his headquarters area. The ERC further found that the Grievor’s travel status had been authorized through the completion of forms A-22A tracking his secondments. In support of this position, the ERC relied on section G.1.e of the CMM 3 which stated that “[a] temporary transfer must be indicated as such on form A-22A”. In finding that the Grievor was in travel status for the duration of his secondments, the ERC determined that he was entitled to meal, accommodation and incidental allowances in accordance with the AM VI.1.  

The ERC recommended that the Commissioner allow the grievance.

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

The Griever challenged a decision by the Respondent to deny his claim for travel expenses incurred by him for durations in which he was temporarily seconded outside his home detachment area. At Level I, the Adjudicator denied the grievance, finding that the Griever had not sought pre-approval for his travel status, and that he failed to establish that the Respondent's decision was inconsistent with policy. The Griever sought a review at Level II. The ERC recommended that the grievance be allowed, finding that the Griever was in travel status during his secondments, due to the RCMP's decision to transfer the Griever without permanently changing his headquarters area. The Commissioner agreed, and allowed the Grievance.