B-146380, DEC. 13, 1962
Highlights
IN THE LETTER OF NOVEMBER 6 IT IS STATED THAT IN RENDERING OUR PRIOR DECISION IN THE MATTER WE DID NOT CONSIDER ALL THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANTS AND OUR ATTENTION IS CALLED TO PARTICULAR PAGES OF A BRIEF WHICH CONTRADICTS STATEMENTS MADE BY OFFICIALS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. OCCASIONALLY CASES OF THIS NATURE COME BEFORE US FOR SETTLEMENT WHEN IT IS IMPOSSIBLE ON THE WRITTEN RECORD TO RESOLVE ISSUES OF FACT. SINCE THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE IS NOT A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING BODY. IT SOMETIMES IS IN THE INTEREST OF THE CLAIMANT TO PURSUE HIS REMEDY IN THE COURTS WHERE THE PARTIES AND THEIR WITNESSES MAY BE HEARD AND CROSS- EXAMINED AND THE LAW APPLIED TO THE ISSUE OF FACTS THUS DECIDED.
B-146380, DEC. 13, 1962
TO MR. ALTON F. BOHLKE, PRESIDENT, MR. WINSTON F. DAVIDS, SECRETARY:
THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 6, 1962, CONCERNING YOUR CLAIMS AND CLAIMS OF CERTAIN OTHER EMPLOYEES OF THE AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOR OVERTIME COMPENSATION CLAIMED COVERING 30 MINUTES EACH WORKDAY DURING THE PERIOD MAY 31, 1959, TO MARCH 12, 1960.
IN THE LETTER OF NOVEMBER 6 IT IS STATED THAT IN RENDERING OUR PRIOR DECISION IN THE MATTER WE DID NOT CONSIDER ALL THE EVIDENCE SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANTS AND OUR ATTENTION IS CALLED TO PARTICULAR PAGES OF A BRIEF WHICH CONTRADICTS STATEMENTS MADE BY OFFICIALS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. IN RENDERING OUR PRIOR DECISIONS IN THE MATTER WE CONSIDERED THE ENTIRE BRIEF SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE CLAIMANTS AND OTHER EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE CLAIMANTS AS WELL AS THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE.
OCCASIONALLY CASES OF THIS NATURE COME BEFORE US FOR SETTLEMENT WHEN IT IS IMPOSSIBLE ON THE WRITTEN RECORD TO RESOLVE ISSUES OF FACT. SINCE THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE IS NOT A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING BODY, IT SOMETIMES IS IN THE INTEREST OF THE CLAIMANT TO PURSUE HIS REMEDY IN THE COURTS WHERE THE PARTIES AND THEIR WITNESSES MAY BE HEARD AND CROSS- EXAMINED AND THE LAW APPLIED TO THE ISSUE OF FACTS THUS DECIDED. THE ISSUE IN THE CASE AT HAND--- WHETHER THE EMPLOYEES ACTUALLY WORKED DURING THEIR LUNCH PERIODS--- SUGGESTS THAT SUCH PROCEDURE MAY BE PROPER HERE.
CONCERNING YOUR REFERENCE TO THE VISIT BY REPRESENTATIVES OF OUR OFFICE TO CONGRESSMAN PIKE'S OFFICE TO DISCUSS THE CASE, IT MAY BE STATED THAT ON OCTOBER 3, 1962, CONGRESSMAN PIKE WAS FURNISHED A COPY OF THE BRIEF AND RELATED DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THE CLAIMS OF THE EMPLOYEES STATIONED AT PLUM ISLAND.
THEREFORE, WE MUST SUSTAIN THE PRIOR ACTION TAKEN BY OUR OFFICE IN DISALLOWING THE CLAIMS.