February 17, 2010
21.4.983
Background
The employee grieved the department's refusal to reimburse non-commercial accommodation expenses while on authorized government travel for training purposes.
Bargaining Agent Presentation
The Bargaining Agent representative submitted that the grievor travelled to City A from the grievor's workplace in City B to participate in training sessions. The grievor required accommodation for the evenings and made it clear that the preference was private non-commercial accommodation.
The Bargaining Agent representative submitted that the issue of ownership as regards the private non-commercial accommodation is irrelevant to the payment of the allowance. The NJC Travel Directive does not indicate that the allowance cannot be paid because an employee owns the private accommodation.
The Bargaining Agent representative is of the opinion that the grievor should be paid for the accommodation type chosen which was approximately $100.00 per night less than staying in a hotel.
Departmental Presentation
The Departmental representative submitted that the manager agreed that the grievor could participate in training in City A but given the fact that the grievor owned a residence in City A where the grievor's family continued to reside, that there would be no reimbursement for accommodation while on travel status.
The Departmental representative submitted that the grievor is not entitled to be reimbursed for private non-commercial accommodation because the employee owns the residence in City A, where the grievor's family resides permanently and where the grievor returns to on weekends. Furthermore, the City A address is indicated to be the grievor's home address on the travel authority and advance form and on the travel expense claims submitted in August and September 2008 but not on those for October 2008.
The Departmental representative submitted that according to the NJC Travel Directive, the definition of private non-commercial accommodation is "a private dwelling or non-commercial facility where the traveler does not normally reside." The Departmental representative is of the opinion that the employee "normally resides" at the residence in City A for family reasons and as a result, the grievor's residence does not meet the definition of a private non-commercial accommodation.
The Departmental representative submitted that the provisions contained in the NJC Travel Directive provide for reimbursement of reasonable expenses necessarily incurred while traveling on government business to ensure employees are not out-of-pocket. These provisions do not constitute income or other compensation that would open the way for personal gain. The Departmental representative believes that payment of the private non-commercial accommodation allowance in this instance would result in personal gain as the grievor did not incur any out-of-pocket expenses.
The Departmental representative requested that the Committee consider a recent decision (NJC File No. 21.4.929) where the Executive Committee reached an impasse on a grievance involving similar arguments to those being put forth in this present grievance.
Executive Committee Decision
The Executive Committee considered and agreed with the report of the Government Travel Committee which concluded that the grievor had been treated within the intent of the Travel Directive. It was agreed that based on the definition of private non-commercial accommodation the grievor was not entitled to reimbursement of the allowance for overnight stays at the residence his family continued to reside in and where the grievor returned to on weekends. As such the grievance was denied.