A-44536, SEPTEMBER 14, 1932, 12 COMP. GEN. 355

A-44536: Sep 14, 1932

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

ECONOMY ACT - FURLOUGH DEDUCTIONS THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THE APPLICATION OF SECTION 101 (B) OF THE ECONOMY ACT AND THE RULES PROMULGATED THEREUNDER BY THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE BETWEEN PER ANNUM EMPLOYEES PAID FOR EVERY DAY IN THE YEAR WHO ARE NOT REQUIRED TO WORK ON SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS AND THOSE WHO ARE REQUIRED TO WORK ON SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS. IS REQUESTED. WHOSE RATE OF PAY WAS $3. WAS CARRIED ON THE ROLLS OF THE MEMPHIS DISTRICT FROM JULY 1-12. HE WAS ON ECONOMY ACT LEGISLATIVE FURLOUGH FOR THE PERIOD JULY 3-7. THIS EMPLOYEE WAS EMPLOYED ON A 365-DAY YEAR BASIS. THAT IS. HE WAS REQUIRED TO RENDER SERVICE ON EACH DAY OF THE WEEK AND ON HOLIDAYS. DEDUCTIONS DURING THE PERIOD OF ABSENCE ON LEGISLATIVE FURLOUGH WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE FOR THE PERIOD JULY 5-7.

A-44536, SEPTEMBER 14, 1932, 12 COMP. GEN. 355

ECONOMY ACT - FURLOUGH DEDUCTIONS THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THE APPLICATION OF SECTION 101 (B) OF THE ECONOMY ACT AND THE RULES PROMULGATED THEREUNDER BY THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE BETWEEN PER ANNUM EMPLOYEES PAID FOR EVERY DAY IN THE YEAR WHO ARE NOT REQUIRED TO WORK ON SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS AND THOSE WHO ARE REQUIRED TO WORK ON SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS. AS TO EITHER CLASS OF EMPLOYEES, THE STATUTE SPECIFICALLY REQUIRES A FURLOUGH OF ONE CALENDAR MONTH, TO BE TAKEN ALL AT ONE TIME OR FRACTIONALLY IN SHORTER PERIODS, AND FOR THE LATTER PURPOSE ONLY 24 WORKING DAYS CONSTITUTE A CALENDAR MONTH.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO THE SECRETARY OF WAR, SEPTEMBER 14, 1932:

CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN GIVEN TO YOUR LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 7, 1932, AS FOLLOWS:

YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THE FOLLOWING CASE ARISING UNDER THE LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATION ACT APPROVED JUNE 30, 1932, IS REQUESTED.

AN EMPLOYEE OF THE ENGINEER DEPARTMENT AT LARGE, MEMPHIS, TENNESSEE, EMPLOYED AS PILOT IN TEMPORARY STATUS, WHOSE RATE OF PAY WAS $3,000 PER ANNUM, WAS CARRIED ON THE ROLLS OF THE MEMPHIS DISTRICT FROM JULY 1-12, AND JULY 21, 1932, MAKING A TOTAL OF 13/30 MONTH. HE WAS ON ECONOMY ACT LEGISLATIVE FURLOUGH FOR THE PERIOD JULY 3-7, 1932, INCLUSIVE. THIS EMPLOYEE WAS EMPLOYED ON A 365-DAY YEAR BASIS, THAT IS, HE WAS REQUIRED TO RENDER SERVICE ON EACH DAY OF THE WEEK AND ON HOLIDAYS. HAD THE BASIS OF HIS EMPLOYMENT BEEN THAT OF THE ORDINARY EMPLOYEE ON AN ANNUAL SALARY, DEDUCTIONS DURING THE PERIOD OF ABSENCE ON LEGISLATIVE FURLOUGH WOULD HAVE BEEN MADE FOR THE PERIOD JULY 5-7, 1932, ONLY, JULY 3 HAVING FALLEN ON SUNDAY AND JULY 4 BEING A NATIONAL HOLIDAY. HOWEVER, AS UNDER THE TERMS OF THIS EMPLOYMENT HE WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED TO RENDER SERVICE ON SUNDAY, JULY 3, AND MONDAY, JULY 4, HAD HE BEEN AVAILABLE FOR DUTY, IT WAS CONSIDERED BY THE DISTRICT ENGINEER THAT DEDUCTIONS SHOULD BE MADE FOR THOSE DAYS, EACH BEING A "WORKING DAY" UNDER THE CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT OF THIS EMPLOYEE. DEDUCTIONS THEREFORE WERE MADE AT THE RATE OF ONE AND ONE- FOURTH DAYS FOR EACH DAY OF ABSENCE ON FURLOUGH FROM JULY 3-7, 1932, INCLUSIVE.

THIS EMPLOYEE HAS NOT BEEN EMPLOYED SINCE JULY 21, 1932, AND IT IS UNLIKELY THAT HE WILL AGAIN BE EMPLOYED DURING THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. IT APPEARS THEREFORE THAT TOO MUCH MONEY HAS BEEN IMPOUNDED IN THIS CASE AND THAT THE EMPLOYEE PROBABLY IS DUE TO RECEIVE A REFUND OF AN EXCESS AMOUNT DEDUCTED FROM HIS COMPENSATION. RULING IS REQUESTED AS TO WHETHER IN THE CASE OF AN ANNUAL EMPLOYEE WHOSE CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT CONTEMPLATES THE ACTUAL RENDERING OF SERVICE ON EVERY DAY IN THE YEAR FURLOUGH DEDUCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE MADE AT THE RATE OF 1/30 OF A MONTH'S SALARY OR ONE DAY'S PAY FOR EACH DAY OF ABSENCE ON LEGISLATIVE FURLOUGH, SINCE TO DEDUCT ONE AND ONE-FOURTH DAYS' PAY FOR EACH WORKING DAY IN SUCH CASE WOULD RESULT IN A DEDUCTION IN EXCESS OF ONE MONTH'S PAY FOR ONE MONTH'S ABSENCE, A RESULT NOT CONTEMPLATED BY THE LAW.

IF DEDUCTIONS ON THE BASIS INDICATED WOULD NOT BE PROPER, SHOULD THE DEDUCTIONS HAVE BEEN MADE AT THE RATE OF ONE AND ONE-FOURTH DAYS' PAY FOR JULY 5-7 ONLY, AND THE EMPLOYEE PAID FOR SUNDAY, JULY 3, AND MONDAY, JULY 4, 1932?

THE DISTRICT ENGINEER REPORTS THAT THE EMPLOYEE ACTUALLY WAS PAID ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS:

CHART

GROSS S. AND Q. FURLOUGH NET AMOUNT

EARNED DEDUCTIONS SAVINGS PAID JULY 1-12, 12/30---- $100.00 $9.72 $52.10 $38.18 JULY 21, 1/30------- 8.33 1.39 0.00 6.94

PAY--------------- 108.33 11.11 52.10 45.12

INFORMATION IS REQUESTED AS TO AMOUNT TO BE REFUNDED TO THE EMPLOYEE, IF ANY REFUND BE DUE.

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN THE APPLICATION OF SECTION 101 (B) OF THE ECONOMY ACT AND THE DECISION OF THIS OFFICE DATED JULY 8, 1932, 12 COMP. GEN. 16, BETWEEN PER ANNUM EMPLOYEES PAID FOR EVERY DAY IN THE YEAR WHO ARE NOT REQUIRED TO WORK ON SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS, AND THOSE WHO ARE REQUIRED TO WORK ON SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS. IT IS WITHIN ADMINISTRATIVE AUTHORITY, DUE TO THE EXIGENCIES OF THE SERVICE, TO REQUIRE ALL PER ANNUM EMPLOYEES TO WORK ON SUNDAYS AND HOLIDAYS. AS TO EITHER CLASS OF EMPLOYEES, THE STATUTE SPECIFICALLY REQUIRES A FURLOUGH OF ONE CALENDAR MONTH TO BE TAKEN EITHER ALL AT ONE TIME OR FRACTIONALLY IN SHORTER PERIODS, AND FOR THE LATTER PURPOSE ONLY 24 WORKING DAYS CONSTITUTE A CALENDAR MONTH.

THERE SHOULD BE APPLIED TO THE CLASS OF EMPLOYEES IN QUESTION WHO ARE REQUIRED TO WORK ON EVERY DAY OF THE YEAR THE PRINCIPLES STATED IN THE DECISION OF JULY 8, 1932, SUPRA.

IF THE EMPLOYEE IN QUESTION WAS A TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE, AS STATED, HE WAS NOT SUBJECT TO LEGISLATIVE FURLOUGH UNDER SECTION 101 (B) OF THE ECONOMY ACT, BUT WAS SUBJECT TO THE SALARY REDUCTION PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 105 (D) (6) AND HIS COMPENSATION FOR THE PERIOD ACTUALLY EMPLOYED SHOULD HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY 8 1/3 PERCENT, THE AMOUNT DEDUCTED TO BE IMPOUNDED. SUCH CASES THE REDUCTION SO MADE DOES NOT ENTITLE THE EMPLOYEE TO ANY TIME OFF WITHOUT FURTHER LOSS OF PAY. SEE DECISION OF JULY 20, 1932, 12 COMP. GEN. 84, AND DECISIONS OF AUGUST 8, 1932, A-43642; AUGUST 9, 1932, A- 43840, AND AUGUST 17, 1932, A 43832.

YOU DO NOT STATE THAT A CLAIM FOR REFUND HAS BEEN FILED BY THE EMPLOYEE. IN THE ABSENCE THEREOF NO REFUND SHOULD BE MADE. IF A CLAIM HAS BEEN FILED, OR IS FILED HEREAFTER, THE SAME SHOULD BE FORWARDED WITH ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THIS OFFICE FOR DIRECT SETTLEMENT.