April 6, 2016
41.4.84
Background
The grievor occupied a position in City A. Due to illness in the family, the grievor applied on a position and was successfully deployed within the City B regional office.
It is to be noted that the grievor was provided with a letter of offer for the position in City B after being relocated to City B for 18 months. This letter contained an erroneous work location which was subsequently corrected by the Department.
Following ongoing discussions, the grievor requested that the relocation expenses be reimbursed by the Department. The Employer is of the opinion that the relocation to City B was for personal reasons and at the employee's request, thus denying the reimbursement of relocation expenses.
Grievance
The employee is grieving the Department's decision to deny the request for reimbursement of relocation expenses.
Bargaining Agent Presentation
It is the Bargaining Agent representative's position that the Directive, specifically subsection 1.2.3, does not provide discretion but rather is obligatory to the Department to offer relocation assistance. It was explained that if the Directive applies to an employee that prequalified, under Section 1.4 of the Directive, relocation assistance must be offered to the grievor.
Furthermore, the representative submitted that the grievor was not appropriately advised by the Department, to the extent that they failed to notify the grievor to contact the Contracted Relocation Service Provider (CRSP) prior to engaging in any relocation activities and informed the grievor of the entitlements under the Directive.
The Bargaining Agent representative maintained that the grievor cannot be held responsible for incurring expenses without written approval where the Employer fails to or provides incorrect information regarding its obligations under the Directive.
Departmental Presentation
It is the Departmental representative's position that the grievor initiated the transfer request for personal reasons and was successful in relocating. The representative indicated that there was no staffing planned for that period and generally the positions were filled locally. In addition, the Departmental representative submitted that the grievor did not seek prior authorization for reimbursement of expenses, as per the Directive.
Executive Committee Decision
The Executive Committee considered and agreed with the report of the Relocation Committee which concluded that the grievor was treated within the intent of the NJC Relocation Directive. The Committee further noted that although the Department did not follow the approved staffing measures, the employee was not authorized to relocate. As such, the grievance is denied.