GSB#2011-3602

UNION#2011-0205-0033

IN THE MATTER OF AN ARBITRATION

Under

THE CROWN EMPLOYEES COLLECTIVE BARGAINING ACT

Before

THE GRIEVANCE SETTLEMENT BOARD

BETWEEN

Ontario Public Service Employees Union (McGillis)

Union

• and -

The Crown in Right of Ontario (Ministry of Labour)

Employer

BEFORE

Barry Stephens

Vice-Chair

FOR THE UNION

Alison Nielsen-Jones Ontario Public Service Employees Union Grievance Officer

FOR THE EMPLOYER

Felix Lau Ministry of Government Services Labour Practice Group Counsel

HEARING

December 20, 2012.

Decision

1The grievance relates to the grievor’s claim for mileage for the use of his personal vehicle to attend a meeting in Windsor on September 8, 2011. This decision is issued in accordance with Article 22.16 of the collective agreement, and is without prejudice or precedent.

2The grievor advised his manager by email on August 16 of his intention to use his personal vehicle to travel to Windsor. His intention was to travel to Windsor with his spouse, and, after the meeting, the two of them were going to celebrate their anniversary in the United States.

3The grievor’s manager responded to grievor’s email as follows:

“Ken, for my clarification, the purpose for informing me you are driving your own vehicle is because your wife will be with you.”

4The grievor was denied mileage for the trip to Windsor on the grounds that he failed to secure advance permission to use his personal vehicle. The union argues that the grievor advised his manager that he intended to use his personal vehicle, and the manager’s response amounted to approval. The manager did not raise any concerns or stipulate that the grievor would not be able to claim mileage. In addition, the employer had the ‘benefit’ of the grievor using his own car, in that he did not advance the depreciation of the ministry vehicle he otherwise might have used. The employer responds that the grievor was aware that specific approval was required to use his personal vehicle, and he was not eligible for mileage.

5After reviewing the submissions of the parties and the collective agreement, it is my conclusion that the grievance should be upheld. The employer is ordered to compensate the grievor for the use of his personal vehicle to attend the meeting in Windsor on September 8, 2011. I remain seized to deal with any issues arising from the implementation of this award.