A-24648, OCTOBER 18, 1928, 8 COMP. GEN. 201

A-24648: Oct 18, 1928

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

WHO WAS REINSTATED IN THE UNITED STATES VETERANS' BUREAU ON SEPTEMBER 22. WAS NOT ENTITLED TO INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FOR SERVICE IN THE VETERANS' BUREAU. WHEREBY WAS DISALLOWED HER CLAIM FOR INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES RENDERED AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE UNITED STATES VETERANS' BUREAU FROM SEPTEMBER 22. IT APPEARS THAT CLAIMANT WAS EMPLOYED BY THE WAR DEPARTMENT FROM JANUARY 31. SHE WAS CERTIFIED BY THE SECRETARY OF WAR. WAS PAID INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FROM THAT DATE TO JUNE 30. AT WHICH TIME HER BASIC SALARY WAS $1. CLAIMANT WAS APPOINTED TO A POSITION IN THE VETERANS' BUREAU AT $1. 100 PER ANNUM AND WAS NOT PAID INCREASE OF COMPENSATION. THE EMPLOYEES OF THE VETERANS' BUREAU WERE PAID FROM LUMP-SUM APPROPRIATIONS AND THE BUREAU WAS CREATED BY THE ACT OF AUGUST 9.

A-24648, OCTOBER 18, 1928, 8 COMP. GEN. 201

COMPENSATION - INCREASE - VETERANS' BUREAU AN EMPLOYEE OF THE WAR DEPARTMENT WHOSE SERVICE TERMINATED JUNE 30, 1921, AND WHO WAS REINSTATED IN THE UNITED STATES VETERANS' BUREAU ON SEPTEMBER 22, 1921, WAS NOT ENTITLED TO INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FOR SERVICE IN THE VETERANS' BUREAU.

DECISION BY ASSISTANT COMPTROLLER GENERAL GINN, OCTOBER 18, 1928:

MARY M. ROGERS APPLIED OCTOBER 1, 1928, FOR REVIEW OF SETTLEMENT 033542, DATED AUGUST 19, 1924, WHEREBY WAS DISALLOWED HER CLAIM FOR INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES RENDERED AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE UNITED STATES VETERANS' BUREAU FROM SEPTEMBER 22, 1921, TO MARCH 15, 1924.

IT APPEARS THAT CLAIMANT WAS EMPLOYED BY THE WAR DEPARTMENT FROM JANUARY 31, 1918, TO JUNE 30, 1921, WHEN HER SERVICES TERMINATED ON ACCOUNT OF REDUCTION OF FORCE. SHE WAS CERTIFIED BY THE SECRETARY OF WAR, EFFECTIVE AUGUST 1, 1918, AND WAS PAID INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FROM THAT DATE TO JUNE 30, 1921, AT WHICH TIME HER BASIC SALARY WAS $1,200 PER ANNUM.

ON SEPTEMBER 22, 1921, CLAIMANT WAS APPOINTED TO A POSITION IN THE VETERANS' BUREAU AT $1,100 PER ANNUM AND WAS NOT PAID INCREASE OF COMPENSATION.

THE ACT OF MARCH 3, 1921, 41 STAT. 1308, GRANTING INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1922, CONTAINED A PROVISO DENYING THE INCREASE TO EMPLOYEES PAID FROM LUMP-SUM APPROPRIATIONS IN BUREAUS, DIVISIONS, AND OFFICES CREATED BY LAW SINCE JANUARY 1, 1916.

THE EMPLOYEES OF THE VETERANS' BUREAU WERE PAID FROM LUMP-SUM APPROPRIATIONS AND THE BUREAU WAS CREATED BY THE ACT OF AUGUST 9, 1921, 42 STAT. 147. THEREFORE, THE EMPLOYEES OF THE VETERANS' BUREAU GENERALLY WERE NOT ENTITLED TO INCREASE OF COMPENSATION DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1922.

IT WAS HELD, HOWEVER, IN DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1921, 1 COMP. GEN. 152, THAT THE EMPLOYEES OF THE BUREAU OF WAR RISK INSURANCE, TREASURY DEPARTMENT, WHO WERE TRANSFERRED TO THE UNITED STATES VETERANS' BUREAU UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 9, 1921, SUPRA, RETAINED THEIR RIGHT TO RECEIVE INCREASE OF COMPENSATION SUBSEQUENT TO SUCH TRANSFER, IF THEY HAD ACQUIRED SUCH A RIGHT UNDER THE BUREAU OF WAR RISK INSURANCE.

IT WAS HELD IN DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1928, A-682, THAT AN EMPLOYEE WHO WAS SEPARATED FROM THE SERVICE UNDER THE BUREAU OF WAR RISK INSURANCE IN THE FISCAL YEAR 1921, BEING IN RECEIPT OF INCREASE OF COMPENSATION, AND WHO WAS REINSTATED WITHIN A PERIOD OF APPROXIMATELY THREE MONTHS IN THE UNITED STATES VETERANS' BUREAU DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1922, WAS ENTITLED TO INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FROM THE DATE OF REINSTATEMENT IN THE VETERANS' BUREAU. THE RIGHT OF THE EMPLOYEE IN THAT CASE WAS BASED ON THE FACT THAT SHE HAD BEEN AN EMPLOYEE OF THE BUREAU OF WAR RISK INSURANCE AND RETAINED THE RIGHT WHICH SHE WOULD HAVE HAD IF HER SERVICES HAD NOT TERMINATED BUT SHE HAD BEEN TRANSFERRED BY OPERATION OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 9, 1921. ONLY FORMER EMPLOYEES OF THE BUREAU OF WAR RISK INSURANCE WERE ENTITLED TO INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FOR SERVICE IN THE VETERANS' BUREAU DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1922, AND THE EMPLOYEE IN THE DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1928, SUPRA, WAS GIVEN THE SAME RIGHT TO THE INCREASE AFTER REINSTATEMENT AS THOUGH SHE HAD NEVER BEEN OUT OF THE SERVICE.

THE CLAIMANT IN THE INSTANT CASE WAS NOT AN EMPLOYEE OF THE BUREAU OF WAR RISK INSURANCE DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1921, AND, THEREFORE, SHE DID NOT COME WITHIN THE CLASS OF EMPLOYEES WHOSE RIGHT TO RECEIVE THE INCREASE IN THE VETERANS' BUREAU WAS PRESERVED BY OPERATION OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 9, 1921. AS HER FORMER SERVICE WAS NOT IN THE BUREAU OF WAR RISK INSURANCE, THE REINSTATEMENT IN THE VETERANS' BUREAU WITHIN PRACTICALLY THE SAME PERIOD AS THE EMPLOYEE CONSIDERED IN THE DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 20, 1928, COULD NOT PLACE HER IN THE STATUS OF HAVING BEEN TRANSFERRED TO THE VETERANS' BUREAU BY OPERATION OF THE ACT OF AUGUST 9, 1921.

THE ACT OF JUNE 29, 1922, 42 STAT. 712, GRANTING INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1923, DID NOT AUTHORIZE SAID INCREASE TO EMPLOYEES OF THE VETERANS' BUREAU UNLESS THEY HAD RECEIVED IT DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1922. THE ACT OF MARCH 4, 1923, 42 STAT. 1557, GRANTING INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1924, CONTAINED A SIMILAR PROVISION LIMITING THE RIGHT TO THE INCREASE, IN SO FAR AS EMPLOYEES OF THE VETERANS' BUREAU WERE CONCERNED, TO THOSE WHO HAD RECEIVED IT DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1923. SINCE CLAIMANT DID NOT RECEIVE AND WAS NOT ENTITLED TO RECEIVE INCREASE OF COMPENSATION FOR SERVICE IN THE VETERANS' BUREAU DURING THE FISCAL YEAR 1922, SHE WAS NOT ENTITLED THERETO DURING THE FISCAL YEARS 1923 AND 1924.

IT MUST BE HELD, THEREFORE, THAT THE SETTLEMENT WAS CORRECT, AND IT IS, ACCORDINGLY, SUSTAINED.