April 19, 2018
21.4.1102
Background
The employees are Department X employees working at Location A. The employees allege they were not properly compensated (i.e. kilometric rate and meals) while on government travel status, when assigned to the hospital squad at City B hospital. Ten (10) grievances in the present case extend over 4 year period without citing specific dates of travel and are not supported by travel claims, while two (2) grievances are associated with claim forms for intermittent dates between 2009 and 2013. It was specified that none of the grievors were paid, since it was determined by the Employer that the submission of claims four (4) years later is not reasonable.
These grievances are similar in nature to NJC 21.4.1042, 1045, 1048 &1054, 21.4.965 and 21.4.967 as all relate to the differentiation between escort duty and Hospital Surveillance Duty. In the present case, the grievances cover a longer period without identifying specific dates and without submitting travel expense reports.
Grievances 21.4.965 and 21.4.967 were referred to the PSLRB and a decision was issued (2012 PSLRB 31). The PSLRB determined the grievors were conducting hospital surveillance and not escort duty. Thus, the NJC had jurisdiction to rule on the matters.
The NJC allowed the grievance in part and in concluding that the grievance was of a continuing nature, awarded payment up to 25 days prior to the event giving rise to the grievances.
These grievances relate to the Employer’s decision on January 22, 2016, not to apply the previous decision in all similar cases and the decision not to treat these matters as continuing grievances.
The Employer did not consider the grievances to be of a continuing nature (as was stated in the Executive Committee’s decision for 21.4.965 and 21.4.967) and hence provided no remedy to the grievors dating back to twenty-five (25) days prior to the point at which the grievors were informed of the circumstances giving rise to the grievances. Moreover, the Employer has deemed that the timeframe for submitting travel claims has not been respected as per the Travel Directive. The Employer deemed that four (4) years after the fact is not considered reasonable. Therefore, the Employer decided not to accept the travel claims dating back to 2012, as employees must submit travel claims as soon as possible after the travel has occurred.
Grievance
The employees are grieving the Employer’s decision to deny reimbursement of travel expenses while on approved government travel.
Executive Committee Decision
The Executive Committee considered the circumstances and arguments with respect to timeliness concerning this grievance and agreed that the grievance is untimely. As such, the grievance is dismissed.