October 11, 2018
21.4.1118
Background
The grievor occupied a position located In City A, Province Y. In January 2009, the grievor was assigned to City B, Province Y, for three days per week as a replacement. It was confirmed by the parties that no letter of offer or agreement pertaining to the arrangement was ever prepared. The grievor worked three days a week at the City B office and two days a week at the grievor’s regular place of duty. It was noted that the new work location was closer to the grievor’s house. The City B office was 70 km away from the grievor’s regular place of duty and 22 km away from the grievor’s home. The grievor continued working at both locations until beginning a period of extended leave on August 22, 2016, followed by the grievor’s retirement on April 14, 2017.
Grievance
The grievor is grieving not being treated within the intent of the NJC Travel Directive as the Employer did not reimburse the mileage, per diems and meals resulting from the grievor travelling to a workplace outside of the headquarters area since 2009.
Executive Committee Decision
The Executive Committee considered the circumstances and arguments with respect to timeliness concerning this grievance and agreed the grievance is untimely. As such, the grievance was dismissed.