Grievance Case Summary - G-236

The member presented a grievance concerning a transfer notice he had received under the RCMP Workforce Adjustment Directive ("the Directive"). A preliminary issue raised by this grievance is whether the External Review Committee has jurisdiction in matters relating to the application of this Directive.

Section 33 of the RCMP Act indicates that only grievances prescribed by regulation, namely those listed at section 36 of the RCMP Regulations, may be referred to the Committee. In the present case, the issue is whether the Directive pertains to "the Force's interpretation and application of government policies that apply to government departments and that have been made to apply to members" (s. 36a)) or whether application of this policy may be regarded as an "administrative discharge for grounds specified in paragraph 19(a), (f) or (i)"(s. 36e)).

Sections 19a), f) and i), to which s. 36e) refers, deal with discharge on the grounds of "physical or mental disability", "abandonment of post", or "irregular appointment". A discharge resulting from the application of the Directive is considered, instead, to be grounded in "the promotion of economy and efficiency in the Force", according to paragraph 1.1.7 of the Directive. This is the ground stipulated at s. 19c) of the RCMP Regulations. Accordingly, the Committee found that the grievance did not fall into the category described at s. 36e) of the Regulations.

The Committee also found that the Directive did not constitute a government policy that applied to "government departments" within the meaning of s.36a) of the Regulations, since this Directive applied to the RCMP exclusively. There is a different policy in force which applies to government departments with regard to workforce adjustment. There are significant differences between the two policies; therefore, it is not possible to conclude that the two policies are essentially one and the same.

On August 18, 1999, the Committee concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to hear this grievance and abstained from making a recommendation on the merits to the Commissioner.