November 2, 2012
21.4.1029, 21.4.1032, 21.4.1033
Background
The employees grieved the Employer's refusal to compensate them for meals per the NJC Travel Directive.
Bargaining Agent Presentation
The Bargaining Agent representative explained that the grievors are shift workers and at times they relieve at other ports. As a result, they have to travel to other workplaces than their regular workplace.
It was submitted that in grievance 21.4.1029, the grievor's regular scheduled variable shifts were from 15:00 to 24:00 exclusive of .5 hour meal period. On April 12, 2010, the grievor was sent to work at a port outside headquarters area from 15:30 to 22:00 after which the grievor returned to regular port. The grievor had eaten lunch prior to leaving for work and was required to travel outside of headquarters area over the customary dinner period. Therefore, the Bargaining Agent representative requested that the grievance be granted and that the dinner rate be paid.
In grievances 21.4.1032 and 21.4.1033 both grievors have regular scheduled variable shifts of 12.5 hours exclusive of .5 hour meal period. On June 22 and June 29, 2010, respectively, they each worked at a port outside their headquarters area from 9:00 to 22:00 and then travelled home. They claimed mileage and the meal allowance for lunch and dinner. The Bargaining Agent representative noted the absence of an entitlement to meals during overtime periods within the collective agreement as the clause does not apply to an employee who is in travel status which entitles the employee to claim expenses for meals. The grievors were absent from home for over 14 hours and it was unreasonable to deny a dinner allowance.
Departmental Presentation
The Departmental representative recognized that the grievors were on travel status and submitted that according to the jurisprudence, the appropriate mid-shift meal allowance is the lunch rate.
In grievance 21.4.1029, the grievor was gone from the regular workplace for only 7 ½ hours on April 12, 2010. The grievance should be denied as the grievor was entitled only to the mid-shift meal: a lunch.
The Departmental representative further noted that in grievances 21.4.1032 and 21.4.1033 even though both grievors worked a 13 hours shift respectively on June 22 and June 29, 2010, the port where the grievors worked adhere to a Variable Shift Schedule Agreement (VSSA), which provides for one meal period at the midpoint of their shift. The negotiation of long hours shift with only one meal period is the choice of the employees. In ports where two meal periods were negotiated within the VSSA, the employees who provide relief and are on travel status are reimbursed for lunch and dinner meals under the Directive. The grievors were away from their residence an average of 45 minutes longer when on travel status than when working at their regular workplace. In addition, the NJC Travel Directive is silent on the times when a meal is to be taken and on the length of the shift for non-standard workers. Allowing the payment of two meal allowances when one meal period is provided would be adding to the Directive, which specifically acknowledges the difference between day and shift workers.
The Department complied with the Directive in compensating the grievors for their mid-shift meal at the lunch rate when the grievors were on travel status over the mid-point of their shift.
The Departmental representative therefore requested that the grievance be denied. However, should the Committee find that the grievors are entitled to two meals when they are provided with one meal period, the Department seeks the guidance of the NJC with respect to the length of time required between meals in order to ensure that VSSAs comply with the Directive.
Executive Committee Decision
The Executive Committee considered and agreed with the report of the Government Travel Committee which concluded that in grievance 21.4.1029, the grievor had been treated within the intent of the Directive. Regarding grievances, 21.4.1032 and 1033, it was agreed that in this particular case the grievors had not been treated within the intent of the Directive. Because their collective agreement states that "Meal allowances under [the overtime] clause shall not apply to an employee who is in travel status" and their Variable Shift Schedule Agreement is silent on meals while on travel status, the Directive applies and they should have been granted two meals: lunch and dinner. As such grievance 21.4.1029 was denied and grievances 21.4.1032 and 21.4.1033 were upheld.