B-129760, MAY 15, 1957
Highlights
BOTH DATES INCLUSIVE) IS ACCEPTABLE PROVIDED THAT SUCH ACCEPTANCE WOULD NOT CONSTITUTE A RELINQUISHMENT OF THE RIGHT TO PURSUE WHATEVER CLAIM MR. RYAN MIGHT HAVE AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY FOR SICK LEAVE SAID TO HAVE BEEN LOST TO HIM. YOU ARE ADVISED THAT THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE SETTLEMENT OF THE BACK PAY CLAIM UPON THE BASIS INDICATED IN OUR LETTER OF APRIL 4. WILL NOT BE VIEWED BY US AS A RELINQUISHMENT OF THE CLAIM FOR SICK LEAVE. WE ARE TODAY INSTRUCTING OUR CLAIMS DIVISION TO PROCEED WITH THE SETTLEMENT OF THE BACK PAY CLAIM. YOU WERE ADVISED IN OUR LETTER OF APRIL 4. THAT THERE IS NO PROVISION OF LAW AUTHORIZING PAYMENT FOR AN EMPLOYEE'S SICK LEAVE AFTER HIS SEPARATION FROM SERVICE.
B-129760, MAY 15, 1957
TO CALVIN N. CHILDRESS, ESQUIRE
WE REFER TO YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 16, 1957, REGARDING THE CLAIMS OF YOUR CLIENT, MR. ALBERT F. RYAN, SR. YOU SAY THAT THE PROPOSAL IN OUR LETTER OF APRIL 4, 1957, TO ALLOW BACK PAY FOR THE PERIOD "FROM DECEMBER 11, 1949 TO DECEMBER 12, 1950" (CORRECTLY, DECEMBER 12, 1949, TO DECEMBER 13, 1950, BOTH DATES INCLUSIVE) IS ACCEPTABLE PROVIDED THAT SUCH ACCEPTANCE WOULD NOT CONSTITUTE A RELINQUISHMENT OF THE RIGHT TO PURSUE WHATEVER CLAIM MR. RYAN MIGHT HAVE AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY FOR SICK LEAVE SAID TO HAVE BEEN LOST TO HIM.
YOU ARE ADVISED THAT THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE SETTLEMENT OF THE BACK PAY CLAIM UPON THE BASIS INDICATED IN OUR LETTER OF APRIL 4, 1957, WILL NOT BE VIEWED BY US AS A RELINQUISHMENT OF THE CLAIM FOR SICK LEAVE. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE TODAY INSTRUCTING OUR CLAIMS DIVISION TO PROCEED WITH THE SETTLEMENT OF THE BACK PAY CLAIM.
WE SUGGEST FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPEDITING SETTLEMENT OF THE CLAIM THAT MR. RYAN PROMPTLY FURNISH OUR CLAIMS DIVISION AN AFFIDAVIT SETTING FORTH IN DETAIL HIS EMPLOYMENT HISTORY FOR THE PERIOD DECEMBER 12, 1949, THROUGH DECEMBER 13, 1950, SHOWING HIS EARNINGS FOR THAT PERIOD.
YOU WERE ADVISED IN OUR LETTER OF APRIL 4, 1957, THAT THERE IS NO PROVISION OF LAW AUTHORIZING PAYMENT FOR AN EMPLOYEE'S SICK LEAVE AFTER HIS SEPARATION FROM SERVICE; AND THAT THE MATTER OF WHETHER THE LEAVE SHOULD BE RECREDITED IN CONNECTION WITH MR. RYAN'S SUBSEQUENT EMPLOYMENT IS ONE FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY UNDER APPLICABLE ANNUAL AND SICK LEAVE REGULATIONS.
SINCE IT APPEARS THAT MR. RYAN NOW HAS BEEN RETIRED ON ACCOUNT OF DISABILITY, AND, HENCE, THERE NOW IS NO CURRENT FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT IN CONNECTION WITH WHICH RECREDITED SICK LEAVE COULD BE GRANTED, WE CONCLUDE THAT IT IS APPROPRIATE FOR US TO HOLD OPEN THE CLAIM FOR PAYMENT FOR SICK LEAVE WITH A VIEW TO ASCERTAINING FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY WHETHER DURING MR. RYAN'S LAST EMPLOYMENT THERE WERE ANY PERIODS OF ABSENCES ON ACCOUNT OF ILLNESS OR OTHER CAUSES FOR WHICH THE RECREDITABLE SICK LEAVE MIGHT BE APPROVED FOR SUBSTITUTION. THIS PHASE OF MR. RYAN'S CLAIM WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY FROM THE BACK PAY PORTION, AS HEREINBEFORE INDICATED, AND YOU WILL BE INFORMED AT A LATER DATE OF OUR CONCLUSIONS.