October 27, 2010
21.4.1002
Background
The employee is grieving the department's refusal to reimburse the employee's travel claim. The grievor is requesting reimbursement of the travel claim plus interest.
Bargaining Agent Presentation
The Bargaining Agent representative indicated that the grievor was advised on September 23, 2008 that the grievor had been selected to take part in a "Basic Instructional Technique Course" in another city, from October 6 to 10, 2008. The grievor was informed on September 25, 2008 that two other officers from two other cities would also be attending the training. The grievor offered to pick up the two officers on the grievor's way to training location.
The Bargaining Agent representative indicated that it was confirmed on October 3, 2008 that a specific vehicle would be available on October 5, 2008 at 8:00 a.m. for the grievor's travel.
The Bargaining Agent representative indicated that on October 5, 2008 at 10:20 a.m. the grievor contacted the fleet lot to confirm the availability of the vehicle. The grievor was informed that the vehicle was being used by a superintendent on an operation. The grievor inquired about other fleet vehicles and was advised that the other vehicles were reserved for management.
The Bargaining Agent representative indicated that the grievor decided to use the grievor's personal vehicle as no fleet vehicle was available and that the grievor was expected to pick up two other officers at specific times. At 2:30 p.m. the grievor received a call from a superintendent indicating that the fleet vehicle was now available. The grievor decided not to return to pick up the fleet vehicle as this would have added four hours to the grievor's trip.
The Bargaining Agent representative indicated that the grievor submitted the Travel Expense Claim on October 16, 2008 and that the reimbursement of the grievor's kilometric expense was denied.
The Bargaining Agent representative indicated that the employer failed to adhere to the principles of the Directive.
The Bargaining Agent representative maintained that the grievor made a decision that the grievor believed was appropriate considering all the circumstances and requested the payment of the kilometers travelled as per the Directive.
Departmental Presentation
The Departmental representative indicated that the grievor made no attempt to contact management to explore other options (e.g. use one of the other two vehicles, find out where the reserved vehicle was currently located or when it would be returned, or to obtain authorization to use the grievor's private vehicle).
The Departmental representative indicated that the superintendent called the employee at approximately 2:30 p.m. informing the grievor that the vehicle was now available. The return travel would be an additional four hour drive. When the grievor advised the superintendent that he would continue to travel to the training location the grievor was advised that management would not be pleased with this decision.
The Departmental representative indicated that on October 16, 2008, the grievor submitted the travel claim requesting reimbursement of the mileage in the amount of $846.56 for the use of the grievor's private vehicle to the training location which had not been approved.
The Departmental representative indicated that the Directive stipulates that the employer needs to authorize the travel, that the employee must be familiar with the provisions of the Directive, and that the selection of the mode of transportation shall be based on cost, duration, convenience, safety and practicality.
The Departmental representative indicated that the employer had approved the use of a departmental vehicle because of the cost, convenience, safety and practical aspect. Departmental vehicles are to be used to the fullest extent possible and that the assignment of a vehicle to one individual is strongly discouraged unless justified by operational requirements.
The Departmental representative indicated that the grievor did not speak with management to confirm if the reserved fleet vehicle would become available prior to the grievor's departure, or if the grievor could use one of the other two vehicles that were available. Nor, did the grievor attempt to contact management to obtain authorization to use one of the remaining vehicles, a rental vehicle or the grievor's private vehicle.
The Departmental representative maintains that the grievor decided on his own accord to use a personal vehicle without proper authorization and made no attempt to contact management to obtain the authorization to change travel plans therefore the grievor assumed responsibility for the decision to not comply with the approved travel authority.
Executive Committee Decision
The Executive Committee considered and agreed with the report of the Government Travel Committee which concluded that the employee had not been treated within the intent of the Directive. The Committee reviewed the circumstances in this case and agreed that the grievor incurred expenses while on travel status due to the unavailability of the reserved fleet vehicle and is entitled to the reimbursement of all the kilometers authorized for his travel. However, the NJC does not have jurisdiction to grant an award of interest. As such, the grievance is upheld to the limit of the NJC's jurisdiction.