September 10, 2009
21.4.975, 21.4.976
Background
The employees grieved the department's refusal to pay their breakfast meal allowance while on travel status. The employees' maintain that a continental breakfast was never considered a meal.
Bargaining Agent Presentation
The Bargaining Agent representative submitted that they disagree with management's position that a meal was provided to the employees while on travel status. The Bargaining Agent representative suggested that not allowing employees to claim non-receipted meal per diem goes against several basic principles of the Travel Directive.
The Bargaining Agent representative submitted that NJC and TBS communications dated June 26, 2000 and May 23, 2001 clearly indicate that the purpose of the government-wide Travel Modernization Project was to simplify and streamline the government's travel policy. The Bargaining Agent representative submitted that the institution of daily meal allowances allowed management to decrease their financial administration burden "saving time and money".
The Bargaining Agent representative submitted that in accordance with section 3.3.9 of the Travel Directive, "A traveler shall be paid the applicable meal allowance for each breakfast…" Therefore, it was adduced that employees on travel status must receive the meal allowance; it is not negotiable; no other interpretation can be given to the word shall. The Bargaining Agent representative also put forth that there is no reference in the Travel Directive indicating "that a continental breakfast is to be considered a meal provided or to explain that a complimentary continental breakfast offered in some hotels is to be deducted from a traveler's daily meal per diem." Furthermore, the Bargaining Agent representative referred to the NJC Information Session, Revised Travel Directive (2008), Questions & Answers, May 12, 2008, which makes no mention of whether or not receipts are required in order to claim for a per diem when a continental breakfast is available.
The Bargaining Agent representative submitted that "the provisions contained in the Travel Directive are mandatory and provide for the reimbursement of reasonable expenses necessarily incurred while travelling on government business and ensure that employees are not out of pocket." The Bargaining Agent representative also referred to the Guide to NJC Rates and Allowances to support its position that the employer cannot "arbitrarily determine what a meal is". The rates are calculated by Statistics Canada and approved by the NJC Executive Committee.
The Bargaining Agent representative submitted that in the past employees have always been reimbursed their breakfast meal allowance and this despite the availability of a free continental breakfast. As such, the Bargaining Agent representative submitted that the employer is estopped from requiring a receipt until such time as the Travel Directive is amended or clarified.
The Bargaining Agent representative relied on jurisprudence from the PSSRB (case no. 166-2-21115) to reinforce its position that a continental breakfast does not meet the definition of "a meal provided". In that case the purchase of groceries was questioned as a meal. It was decided that receipts were not required in order for the meal allowance to be paid.
Departmental Presentation
The departmental representative submitted that management's decision not to reimburse the grievors for their breakfast meal allowance was appropriate in the grievors' circumstances. The room rate included a continental breakfast which the employer contends qualifies as "a meal provided". The grievors had an obligation in accordance with section 3.3.9 of the Travel Directive to provide a receipt or a declaration in order to be able to request a reimbursement of an out-of-pocket expense.
The departmental representative submitted that the employer reviewed, between the first and second level of the grievance procedure, the continental breakfast that was available to employees while they were on travel status and found that it was varied and contained all the elements of a well balanced meal according to Canada's Food Guide. The departmental representative submitted that since the meal provided was sufficient the grievors suffered no out-of-pocket expenses and are therefore not entitled to the breakfast allowance.
The departmental representative submitted that the employer has given the grievors several opportunities to provide receipts or declarations to indicate that the meals provided were insufficient. However, to date neither grievor has provided this information to the employer.
Executive Committee Decision
The Executive Committee considered the report of the Government Travel Committee. It was noted that the Government Travel Committee had reached an impasse.
The Executive Committee reviewed the information and circumstances in this case and agreed that the employees had been treated within the intent of the Travel Directive as per Section 3.3.9: "A meal allowance shall not be paid to a traveler with respect to a meal that is provided. In exceptional situations where a traveler has incurred out of pocket expenses to supplement meals provided, the actual incurred costs may be reimbursed, based on receipts, up to the applicable meal allowance." As such, the grievances were denied.
The Executive Committee noted the department's past practice was inconsistent and agreed that the department should clarify the application of the meal allowances with the departmental Travel coordinator(s) for future travel claims.