A-34312, NOVEMBER 22, 1930, 10 COMP. GEN. 233

A-34312: Nov 22, 1930

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

IS NOT PROHIBITED BY THE TERMS OF SECTION 6 OF THE ACT OF MAY 10. FOR THE REASON THE RECORDS OF THIS OFFICE DISCLOSED THAT MISS SHALLER WAS PAID ALSO AT THE RATE OF $2. THIS EMPLOYEE WAS PAID AS A CLERK AT THE RATE OF $1. HER SALARY RATE WAS INCREASED TO $1. SHE WAS PAID ALSO ON THE ROLLS OF THE CUSTOMS SERVICE AT THE RATE OF $200 PER ANNUM FOR SERVICES AS A SPECIAL DISBURSING CLERK. WAS DUE TO THE ACTION OF THIS OFFICE IN SUSPENDING CREDIT IN THE COLLECTOR'S ACCOUNT FOR THE PAYMENT OF $200 PER ANNUM ON THE ROLLS OF THE CUSTOMS SERVICE FOR JULY. THERE IS EVIDENCE BEFORE THIS OFFICE FROM WHICH IT REASONABLY MAY BE CONCLUDED THAT ALL OF THE DUTIES PERFORMED BY MISS SHALLER. - THAT IS.

A-34312, NOVEMBER 22, 1930, 10 COMP. GEN. 233

DEPARTMENTS AND ESTABLISHMENTS - SERVICES BETWEEN BUREAUS - COMPENSATION PAYABLE FROM TWO APPROPRIATIONS FOR SAME DEPARTMENT IF THE POSITION OCCUPIED BY AN EMPLOYEE REQUIRES DUTIES TO BE PERFORMED UNDER TWO BUREAUS OF THE SAME DEPARTMENT, THE PAYMENT OF COMPENSATION UNDER THE TWO APPROPRIATIONS PROVIDED FOR THE RESPECTIVE BUREAUS, AT A RATE IN EXCESS OF $2,000 PER ANNUM, BUT NOT IN EXCESS OF THE MAXIMUM SALARY RATE FIXED FOR THE GRADE OR SALARY RANGE IN WHICH THE POSITION HAS BEEN PLACED OR ALLOCATED, IS NOT PROHIBITED BY THE TERMS OF SECTION 6 OF THE ACT OF MAY 10, 1916, AS AMENDED BY THE ACT OF AUGUST 29, 1916, 39 STAT. 582.

DECISION BY COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL, NOVEMBER 22, 1930:

REVIEW HAS BEEN REQUESTED OF THE ACTION OF THIS OFFICE SEPTEMBER 27, 1930, IN WITHHOLDING CREDIT IN THE ACCOUNTS OF LOUIS M. HALL, COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, ST. LOUIS, MO., FOR THE MONTH OF JULY, 1930, FOR THE AMOUNT PAID TO MISS EDNA E. SHALLER AT THE RATE OF $200 PER ANNUM UNDER THE APPROPRIATION "COLLECTING THE REVENUES FROM CUSTOMS," CUSTOMS SERVICE, FOR THE REASON THE RECORDS OF THIS OFFICE DISCLOSED THAT MISS SHALLER WAS PAID ALSO AT THE RATE OF $2,040 PER ANNUM UNDER THE APPROPRIATION,"OPERATING FORCE FOR PUBLIC BUILDINGS," CUSTODIAN SERVICE, BOTH BUREAUS UNDER THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT.

RECORDS ON FILE IN THIS OFFICE DISCLOSE THAT EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1928, THIS EMPLOYEE WAS PAID AS A CLERK AT THE RATE OF $1,860 PER ANNUM UNDER THE CUSTODIAN SERVICE; THAT EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 16, 1929, HER SALARY RATE WAS INCREASED TO $1,920 PER ANNUM; JUNE 1, 1930, TO $1,980 PER ANNUM; JULY 3, 1930, TO $2,040 PER ANNUM UNDER THE TERMS OF THE BROOKHART SALARY ACT; NOVEMBER 4, 1930, TO $2,160 PER ANNUM; THAT DURING THE PERIOD FROM JULY 1, 1928, TO SOME TIME SUBSEQUENT TO SEPTEMBER 27, 1930, SHE WAS PAID ALSO ON THE ROLLS OF THE CUSTOMS SERVICE AT THE RATE OF $200 PER ANNUM FOR SERVICES AS A SPECIAL DISBURSING CLERK; AND THAT THE INCREASE IN HER SALARY RATE UNDER THE CUSTODIAN SERVICE FROM $2,040 TO $2,160 PER ANNUM AS IN GRADE OR SALARY RANGE CORRESPONDING TO GRADE CAF-4, PRESCRIBED BY THE CLASSIFICATION ACT, WAS DUE TO THE ACTION OF THIS OFFICE IN SUSPENDING CREDIT IN THE COLLECTOR'S ACCOUNT FOR THE PAYMENT OF $200 PER ANNUM ON THE ROLLS OF THE CUSTOMS SERVICE FOR JULY, 1930.

IT APPEARS FROM THE CORRESPONDENCE IN THE CASE AS SUBMITTED TO THIS OFFICE THAT THE POSITION OF THIS EMPLOYEE HAD BEEN ADMINISTRATIVELY PLACED OR ALLOCATED BY THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT IN A FIELD GRADE WITH A SALARY RANGE FROM $1,800 TO $2,100 PER ANNUM FOR THE PERIOD FROM JULY 1, 1928, TO JULY 2, 1930, INCLUSIVE, UNDER THE TERMS OF THE WELCH ACT, AND FROM $1,800 TO $2,160 PER ANNUM ON AND SUBSEQUENT TO JULY 3, 1930, UNDER THE TERMS OF THE BROOKHART SALARY ACT; AND THERE IS EVIDENCE BEFORE THIS OFFICE FROM WHICH IT REASONABLY MAY BE CONCLUDED THAT ALL OF THE DUTIES PERFORMED BY MISS SHALLER--- THAT IS, THOSE PERFORMED IN BOTH BUREAUS UNDER THE ONE DEPARTMENT, WERE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE IN PLACING OR ALLOCATING HER POSITION IN SAID GRADE OR SALARY RANGE. ON THAT BASIS IT MAY BE HELD THAT SHE OCCUPIED ONLY ONE POSITION UNDER THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT INVOLVING DUTIES IN TWO SEPARATE BUREAUS, RATHER THAN TWO SEPARATE POSITIONS, AS THE HOLDING OF TWO SEPARATE POSITIONS, THE AGGREGATE COMPENSATION OF WHICH EXCEEDS THE RATE OF $2,000 PER ANNUM, IS PROHIBITED UNDER SECTION 6 OF THE ACT OF MAY 10, 1916, AS AMENDED BY THE ACT OF AUGUST 29, 1916, 39 STAT. 582, AND THUS THE HOLDING OF TWO POSITIONS UNDER ONE DEPARTMENT IS NOT AUTHORIZED. 3 COMP. GEN. 210; 4 ID. 736. HENCE, FOR THE PERIOD THAT THE TOTAL SALARY RATE PAID HER DID NOT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM AUTHORIZED FOR HER GRADE OR SALARY RANGE, IT MAY BE HELD THAT THE PAYMENTS WERE NOT ILLEGAL. SEE DECISION OF JUNE 30, 1926, 5 COMP. GEN. 1036, 1037, HOLDING AS FOLLOWS:

THE GENERAL RULE IN CASES WHERE ONE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GOVERNMENT LENDS THE SERVICES OF AN EMPLOYEE TO ANOTHER IS THAT THE PAYMENT BY THE ESTABLISHMENT RECEIVING THE BENEFIT OF THE SERVICES COVERS ONLY THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE EMPLOYEE DURING THE PERIOD OF TIME HE IS ENGAGED IN THE WORK OF THE BORROWING ESTABLISHMENT, THE SALARY OF SUCH EMPLOYEE REMAINING A CHARGE AGAINST THE APPROPRIATION OR FUND OF THE ESTABLISHMENT LENDING THE SERVICES. HOWEVER, WHERE, AS IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE APPROPRIATIONS INVOLVED ARE FOR DIFFERENT BUREAUS UNDER THE CONTROL OF ONE DEPARTMENT, THERE APPEARS TO BE NO REASON WHY THE SALARY OF AN EMPLOYEE MAY NOT BE PRORATED AMONG THE DIFFERENT APPROPRIATIONS SO AS TO CHARGE EACH APPROPRIATION WITH THE VALUE OF THE SERVICES RENDERED TO THE BUREAU FOR WHICH SUCH APPROPRIATION IS MADE. THIS MIGHT BE DONE WHERE ONE DISBURSING OFFICER MAKES PAYMENTS FROM ALL THE APPROPRIATIONS INVOLVED BY SHOWING ON THE PAY ROLLS THE TIME SPENT ON THE WORK FOR EACH BUREAU AND DIVIDING THE AMOUNT OF THE SALARY BETWEEN THE APPROPRIATIONS ON A BASIS APPROXIMATING THE EXTENT OF THE SERVICE RENDERED UNDER EACH (SEE DECISION OF APRIL 27, 1926, A 13378), OR, AS SUGGESTED BY YOU, BY PAYING THE ENTIRE SALARY FROM ONE APPROPRIATION AND REIMBURSING SAID APPROPRIATION FROM THE OTHER ON THE BASIS OF THE DAYS SPENT ON WORK UNDER EACH. THE LATTER METHOD IS FEASIBLE, WHETHER PAYMENTS UNDER THE VARIOUS APPROPRIATIONS ARE MADE BY ONE DISBURSING OFFICER OR BY SEVERAL, AND IT WOULD APPEAR TO BE MORE EXPEDIENT.

SEE, ALSO, 9 COMP. GEN. 108.

THERE WAS ADMINISTRATIVE IRREGULARITY IN FAILING TO FOLLOW THE PROCEDURE AS OUTLINED IN SAID DECISION WHERE THE TOTAL SALARY RATE OF AN EMPLOYEE IS PAID UNDER MORE THAN ONE APPROPRIATION PROVIDED FOR THE SAME DEPARTMENT, BUT THAT IRREGULARITY WILL NOT NOW BE CONSIDERED AS HAVING INVALIDATED THE SALARY PAYMENTS TO THE EMPLOYEE UNDER THE TWO APPROPRIATIONS AT A COMBINED RATE NOT IN EXCESS OF THE MAXIMUM PRESCRIBED BY THE GRADE OR SALARY RANGE IN WHICH THE POSITION OCCUPIED HAD BEEN PLACED OR ALLOCATED, WHICH WAS, FOR PERIODS PRIOR TO JULY 3, 1930, $2,100 PER ANNUM, AND FOR PERIODS ON AND AFTER THAT DATE, $2,160 PER ANNUM.

FOR THE PERIOD FROM JULY 1, 1928, TO NOVEMBER 15, 1929, THIS EMPLOYEE RECEIVED A TOTAL SALARY RATE OF $2,060 PER ANNUM, WHICH NEED NOT BE DISTURBED BECAUSE LESS THAN THE RATE OF $2,100 PER ANNUM, THE MAXIMUM FOR HER GRADE. FOR THE PERIOD FROM NOVEMBER 16, 1929, TO MAY 31, 1930, THE EMPLOYEE RECEIVED A TOTAL SALARY RATE OF $2,120 PER ANNUM, OR AT A RATE OF $20 PER ANNUM IN EXCESS OF THE MAXIMUM SALARY RATE PRESCRIBED FOR HER SALARY RANGE. FOR THE PERIOD FROM JUNE 1 TO JULY 2, 1930, THE EMPLOYEE RECEIVED A TOTAL SALARY RATE OF $2,180 PER ANNUM, OR AT A RATE OF $80 PER ANNUM IN EXCESS OF THE MAXIMUM RATE PRESCRIBED FOR HER GRADE OR SALARY RANGE. FOR THE PERIOD JULY 3, TO AND INCLUDING THE DATE THE PAYMENT OF $200 PER ANNUM UNDER THE CUSTOMS APPROPRIATION WAS DISCONTINUED, THE EMPLOYEE RECEIVED A TOTAL SALARY RATE OF $2,240 PER ANNUM, OR AT A RATE OF $80 PER ANNUM IN EXCESS OF THE MAXIMUM OF $2,160 PER ANNUM PRESCRIBED BY THE BROOKHART SALARY ACT FOR HER GRADE OR SALARY RANGE. THE AMOUNT OF THE EXCESSES RECEIVED AS THUS INDICATED IS FOR REFUNDING BY THE EMPLOYEE.