FPSLREB Decisions

Decision Information

Rivietz v. Treasury Board (Citizenship & Immigration Canada)

Collection FPSLREB Decisions
Decision Rendered 2004-06-07
Citation 2004 PSSRB 56
File Number 166-2-31920
Before Yvon Tarte
Decision Type Labour Relations
Subject Terms Overtime
Original Language English
Summary:

No summary has been written for this decision. Please refer to the full text.

Decision Content



Public Service Staff Relations Act

Coat of Arms - Armoiries
  • Date:  2004-06-07
  • File:  166-2-31920
  • Citation:  2004 PSSRB 56

Before the Public Service Staff Relations Board

BETWEEN

LOUIS RIVIETZ

Grievor

and

TREASURY BOARD
(Citizenship & Immigration Canada)

Employer

EXPEDITED ADJUDICATION DECISION



Before:  Yvon Tarte, Chairperson

For the Grievor:   Cécile La Bissonnière, Public Service Alliance of Canada

For the Employer:  Jeff Laviolette

Note:   The parties have agreed to deal with the grievance by way of expedited adjudication. The decision is final and binding on the parties and cannot constitute a precedent or be referred for judicial review to the Federal Court.

Heard at Saint-Sauveur, Quebec,
May 12, 2004.

[1]    This grievance involves a claim for overtime payment for work performed while the grievor was on assignment in the Philippines.

[2]    The following statement of facts was agreed upon by the parties:

  1. At the time of filing the grievance (ONT-01-801), the grievor worked for Citizenship and Immigration Canada at the Greater Toronto Enforcement Centre in Mississauga, Ontario. He performed the duties of a Program Advisor at the PM-04 group and level.

  2. On May 5, 2001, Mr. Rivietz began an eight (8) week temporary duty assignment at the CIC Office in the capital of the Philippines, Manila.

  3. Upon his return to Canada, the grievor submitted an extra duty form for the following hours:
    4. 14 May 2001      2.75 hours
    15 May 2001      2.75 hours
    16 May 2001      2.25 hours
  4. Management did not approve Mr. Rivietz's claim for overtime because he had not received prior approval to work such overtime.

  5. Articles 28, clause 28.04(a) of the Program and Administrative Services collective agreement reads:
    An employee is entitled to overtime compensation under clauses 28.06 and 28.07 for each completed period of fifteen (15) minutes of overtime worked by him or her:

    (i)  when the overtime is authorized in advance by the employer or is in accordance with standard operating instructions.

[3]    The grievor claims that he was told during a training session, prior to leaving for the posting, that overtime would be required during the assignment and that submissions for payment were to be made after his return to Canada.

[4]    Mr. Rivietz stated that his understanding of the overtime situation was confirmed during a telephone conversation with Scott Young, who provided the training session prior to Mr. Rivietz's departure for the Philippines.

[5]    The employer responded that according to persons who dealt with the issue at the training session, attendees were also told that overtime would have to be approved at the mission.

[6]    On the balance of probabilities, I conclude that the grievor's version of events must be accepted. Given that the employer has not tendered documentation to counter Mr. Young's statement, I conclude that reasonable overtime at the mission was authorized in advance during the training session.

[7]    The employer could easily have avoided this situation by requiring that all participants at the training session sign off on a document containing the precise terms and conditions of their assignment.

[8]    The grievance is therefore allowed.

Yvon Tarte,
Chairperson

Ottawa, June 7, 2004.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.