A-55053, MAY 23, 1934, 13 COMP. GEN. 382

A-55053: May 23, 1934

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

IN A HIGHER GRADE CARRYING A HIGHER RATE OF COMPENSATION IS PROHIBITED BY SECTION 3 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 16. AS FOLLOWS: FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE DISALLOWANCE ON VOUCHER NO. 2500 ON THE JUNE 1933 ACCOUNTS OF E. WHICH PROVISION IS AS FOLLOWS: "NO PART OF THE APPROPRIATIONS IN THIS ACT OR PRIOR APPROPRIATION ACTS SHALL BE USED TO PAY ANY INCREASE IN THE SALARY OF ANY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BY REASON OF THE REALLOCATION OF THE POSITION OF SUCH OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE TO A HIGHER GRADE AFTER JUNE 30. IS APPLICABLE TO ANY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE WHOSE POSITION AS OF JUNE 30. IS APPLICABLE TO ANY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE WHOSE POSITION AS OF JUNE 30. IN THE CASE OF MISS MCKAIG THERE WAS NOT INVOLVED A REALLOCATION OF HER POSITION BASED ON THE SAME DUTIES SHE HAD BEEN PERFORMING OR AN ACCRETION OF ADDITIONAL TASKS.

A-55053, MAY 23, 1934, 13 COMP. GEN. 382

CLASSIFICATION - REALLOCATION OF POSITIONS SINCE JUNE 30, 1932 WHILE AN INCREASE IN COMPENSATION MAY NOT BE A REALLOCATION IN THE SENSE USED BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ANY INCREASE IN COMPENSATION WHICH RESULTS FROM THE ACTION OF THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION IN PLACING OR ALLOCATING THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF AN EMPLOYEE CURRENT AS OF JUNE 30, 1932, IN A HIGHER GRADE CARRYING A HIGHER RATE OF COMPENSATION IS PROHIBITED BY SECTION 3 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 16, 1933, 48 STAT. 304.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO THE SECRETARY OF WAR, MAY 23, 1934:

THERE HAS BEEN RECEIVED YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 16, 1934, AS FOLLOWS:

FURTHER REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE DISALLOWANCE ON VOUCHER NO. 2500 ON THE JUNE 1933 ACCOUNTS OF E. M. LAWTON, DISBURSING CLERK OF THE WAR DEPARTMENT, IN THE CASE OF MARY M. MCKAIG, AN EMPLOYEE OF THE WAR DEPARTMENT, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU, WHOSE CHANGE IN ALLOCATION FROM CAF 3 TO CAF-4 HAS HERETOFORE BEEN REGARDED AS A REALLOCATION WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 3 OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION ACT OF JUNE 16, 1933, WHICH PROVISION IS AS FOLLOWS:

"NO PART OF THE APPROPRIATIONS IN THIS ACT OR PRIOR APPROPRIATION ACTS SHALL BE USED TO PAY ANY INCREASE IN THE SALARY OF ANY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BY REASON OF THE REALLOCATION OF THE POSITION OF SUCH OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE TO A HIGHER GRADE AFTER JUNE 30, 1932, BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD OR THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, AND SALARIES PAID ACCORDINGLY SHALL BE PAYMENT IN FULL.'

IN YOUR DECISION OF JULY 6, 1933, A-49709, YOU STATE THAT:

"* * * SECTION 3 OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION ACT, 1934, DATED JUNE 16, 1933, PUBLIC, NO. 78, QUOTED IN YOUR LETTER, IS APPLICABLE TO ANY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE WHOSE POSITION AS OF JUNE 30, 1932, HAS SINCE BEEN REALLOCATED UPWARD BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD OR THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, AND SALARIES PAID ACCORDINGLY SHALL BE PAYMENT IN FULL.'

IN YOUR DECISION OF JULY 6, 1933, A-49709, YOU STATE THAT:

"* * * SECTION 3 OF THE INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION ACT, 1934, DATED JUNE 16, 1933, PUBLIC, NO. 78, QUOTED IN YOUR LETTER, IS APPLICABLE TO ANY OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE WHOSE POSITION AS OF JUNE 30, 1932, HAS SINCE BEEN REALLOCATED UPWARD BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD OR THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION EITHER UPON THE BASIS OF THE SAME CLASSIFICATION SHEET WHICH DETERMINED THE PRIOR GRADE, OR ON THE BASIS OF A NEW CLASSIFICATION SHEET REDESCRIBING THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE CURRENT AS OF JUNE 30, 1932. * * *"

AGAIN IN YOUR DECISION OF JULY 14, 1933, A-49885, YOU DEFINE THE PHRASE "REALLOCATION OF THE POSITION," AS FOLLOWS:

"REFERRING TO QUESTION 1, THE PHRASE "REALLOCATION OF THE POSITION" MAY BE DEFINED GENERALLY TO MEAN ANY ACTION REQUIRED TO BE TAKEN BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD OR THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION UNDER THE TERMS OF THE CLASSIFICATION ACT, AS AMENDED, AS INTERPRETED BY THE DECISIONS OF THIS OFFICE, ADVANCING THE GRADE OF A POSITION BASED ON THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES CURRENT AS OF JUNE 30, 1932.'

IN THE CASE OF MISS MCKAIG THERE WAS NOT INVOLVED A REALLOCATION OF HER POSITION BASED ON THE SAME DUTIES SHE HAD BEEN PERFORMING OR AN ACCRETION OF ADDITIONAL TASKS, BUT A COMPLETE CHANGE OF ASSIGNMENT FROM ONE POSITION TO ANOTHER REQUIRING AN ORIGINAL ALLOCATION, AND IT IS FELT THAT SUCH COMPLETE CHANGE IN ASSIGNMENT INVOLVING AN ORIGINAL ALLOCATION OF A NEWLY CREATED POSITION SHOULD NOT BE REGARDED AS CONSTITUTING A REALLOCATION, AND ACCORDINGLY A FURTHER REVIEW OF THE CASE IS REQUESTED.

THE DECISION OF JULY 6, 1933, 13 COMP. GEN. 1, QUOTED IN YOUR LETTER, STATES THE RULE FOR APPLYING SECTION 3 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 16, 1933, 48 STAT. 304.

THE DISBURSING OFFICER, IN REPLY TO THE NOTICE OF EXCEPTION IN THIS CASE, STATED, NOVEMBER 6, 1933, AS FOLLOWS:

MARY M. MCKAIG, CLERK, CAF 3, AT $1,680 PER ANNUM, WAS, ON MARCH 1, 1932, ASSIGNED TO A NEW JOB WITH ENTIRELY NEW DUTIES. THIS NEW JOB WAS ALLOCATED BY THE DEPARTMENT TO CAF 4, AND A JOB CLASSIFICATION SHEET SUBMITTED. ON DECEMBER 15, 1932, THE WAR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED NOTIFICATION OF THE FINAL ALLOCATION OF THE NEW POSITION BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION TO CAF 4. THE ACTION TAKEN IN THIS CASE WAS NOT THE REALLOCATION OF THE POSITION HELD BY THE CLERK, BUT WAS THE ORIGINAL AND ONLY ALLOCATION OF THE NEW POSITION TO WHICH SHE WAS ASSIGNED ON MARCH 1, 1932. THE CASE DOES NOT THEREFORE COME WITHIN THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 3 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 16, 1933.

THE PAY ROLL FOR DECEMBER 1932, VOUCHER 1176, BEARS FOR THIS EMPLOYEE THE NOTATION "CAF-GR. 3, $1,680 TO GR. 4, $1,800, REALL.REC D. 12-15-32. EOD.MAR. 1/32," AND THE CHANGE APPEARS ON THE LIST OF REALLOCATIONS MADE SINCE JUNE 30, 1932, FURNISHED THIS OFFICE BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION. IT THUS APPEARS THAT THE NEW POSITION THE DUTIES OF WHICH WERE ALLOCATED TO GRADE CAF 4 WAS THE IDENTICAL POSITION THE DUTIES OF WHICH THE EMPLOYEE WAS PERFORMING ON JUNE 30, 1932.

WHILE IT MAY BE THAT THE INCREASE IN COMPENSATION IN THIS CASE WAS NOT A REALLOCATION IN THE SENSE USED BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, THE THE INCREASE IN COMPENSATION WAS THE RESULT OF ACTION BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION IN PLACING OR ALLOCATING THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THIS EMPLOYEE CURRENT AS OF JUNE 30, 1932, IN A HIGHER GRADE CARRYING A HIGHER RATE OF COMPENSATION.

EVEN IF THIS WERE TO BE REGARDED AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROMOTION OF AN EMPLOYEE TO A NEW POSITION, THE INCREASE IN COMPENSATION WOULD, NEVERTHELESS, HAVE BEEN UNAUTHORIZED IN THE ABSENCE OF PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL. SEE DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 21, 1933, A-50847.

ON THE BASIS OF THE RECORD BEFORE THE OFFICE, THE AUDIT ACTION IN DISALLOWING THE AMOUNT OF THE INCREASE IN COMPENSATION PAID TO MARY M. MCKAIG MUST BE AND IS SUSTAINED.