August 25, 2010
21.4.1001
Background
The employee is grieving the employer's decision to reduce the amount of his claim. The employee alleges that the destination was in the US and since he departed from a city in Canada, he was not "visiting" a location in Canada; therefore, the grievor believes that reimbursement for all incidentals should be in US currency.
Bargaining Agent Presentation
The Bargaining Agent representative submitted that the grievor did not "visit" a location in Canada. The Bargaining Agent representative relied on the definition of "visit" in the Oxford English Dictionary which states: "go to see and spend some time with (someone) socially or as a guest"; or "go to see and spend some time (in a place) as a tourist or guest".
The Bargaining Agent representative submitted that the grievor was entitled to be paid the incidental allowance at the appropriate rate for the destination, i.e. the American rate.
Departmental Presentation
The Departmental representative submitted that the Department recognizes that the employee was on travel status and is entitled to the incidental expense allowance as per Appendix C. It does not however, agree with the employee's interpretation of section 3.3.7 when an employee travels from Canada to the continental U.S.A.
The Departmental representative submitted that as per the NJC Travel Directive, when a traveller visits Canada or the continental U.S.A. on the same day, the incidental expense allowance is that for the location where the day commences. There is no indication that the incidental expense allowance is be paid on the basis of the travel destination. On the contrary, section 3.3.7 stipulates specifically that "the incidental expense allowance shall be that for the location where the day commences".
The Departmental representative submitted that in this instance, the incidental expense allowance was calculated in Canadian currency on the grievor's first day of the travel (March 5, 2009) since the grievor travelled from Canada to the U.S.A. The same principle was applied when the grievor returned to Canada (March 9, 2009); the incidental expense allowance was calculated in American currency because the grievor's day commenced in the continental U.S.A.
Executive Committee Decision
The Executive Committee considered and agreed with the report of the Government Travel Committee which concluded that the grievor was treated within the intent of section 3.3.7 of the NJC Travel Directive.
The Committee agreed that as per section 3.3.7, the incidental expense allowance was calculated appropriately in Canadian currency on the grievor's first day of travel as he travelled from a city in Canada to a city in the United States. The Committee recognized that the phrase "traveller visits locations" can have different meanings, however, the intent of section 3.3.7 is clear that the incidental expense allowance is calculated in the currency of the country in which a traveller commences his/her day. As such, the grievance was denied.