Grievance Case Summary - G-733

In October 2008, the Grievor received a salary overpayment. In September 2011, the Respondent contacted her to inform her of the overpayment and discuss the terms and conditions for recovery. As she was of the opinion that the limitation period had expired, the Grievor filed a grievance disputing the recovery.

The grievance was denied on its merits at Level I. During the Level I proceedings, the Grievor was considered a civilian member of the RCMP. Consequently, the issue of standing was never raised. At Level II, it was noted that the Grievor had been hired by the RCMP as a Temporary Civilian Employee (TCE) and therefore had never held civilian member status. The Grievor's standing was thus called into question.

The evidence on file shows that the Grievor was never employed as a regular or civilian member of the RCMP. The ERC is therefore of the opinion that she did not have standing as a grievor in her grievance.

The ERC recommended that the grievance be denied.

The Commissioner’s decision, as summarized by her office, is as follows:

[Translation]

While she was a Temporary Civilian Employee (TCE), the Grievor received a salary overpayment. When the Respondent attempted to recover this amount, the Grievor objected on the basis that the limitation period for doing so had expired. The Level I Adjudicator determined that the grievance was to be denied for lack of merit. Before the grievance could be heard at Level II, it was learned for the first time that the Grievor was a TCE, rather than a civilian member, which raised the issue of standing. The ERC was of the view that, because she was a TCE, the Grievor did not have standing and recommended that the Commissioner deny the grievance. The Commissioner agrees with the ERC’s recommendation and denies the grievance.