A-6052, DECEMBER 9, 1924, 4 COMP. GEN. 521

A-6052: Dec 9, 1924

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

IS PROHIBITED BY THE ACT OF MAY 10. NOTWITHSTANDING THE EMPLOYEE MAY HAVE BEEN ON A LEAVE OF ABSENCE FROM ONE OF THE POSITIONS. THE COMMISSIONER OF PENSIONS HAS FOUND THAT THERE IS TO THE CREDIT OF THE CLAIMANT IN THE RETIREMENT FUND. WHICH WAS AT THE RATE OF $5.84 PER DAY. WHICH WAS AT THE ANNUAL RATE OF $1. THE CLAIMANT WAS NOTIFIED OF THE EXCESS PAYMENT AND REQUESTED TO REFUND THE $21.23. IN WHICH YOU STATE THAT I WAS EMPLOYED IN TWO PLACES AT ONE TIME. IT IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS. NOW PLEASE DON-T LOSE SIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THAT VACATION WAS EARNED BEFORE JAN. 5. I WAS GIVEN PAY IN LIEU OF VACATION. IT IS SIMPLY A CASE THAT THE METHOD OF BOOKKEEPING IN THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE SHOWS ME HOLDING DOWN TWO JOBS AT ONE TIME.

A-6052, DECEMBER 9, 1924, 4 COMP. GEN. 521

ACCOUNTING, SET-OFF - RETIREMENT DEDUCTIONS THE RECEIPT BY AN EMPLOYEE OF TWO SALARIES EXCEEDING IN THE AGGREGATE THE ANNUAL RATE OF $2,000, IS PROHIBITED BY THE ACT OF MAY 10, 1916, 39 STAT. 120, AS AMENDED BY THE ACT OF AUGUST 29, 1916, 39 STAT. 582, NOTWITHSTANDING THE EMPLOYEE MAY HAVE BEEN ON A LEAVE OF ABSENCE FROM ONE OF THE POSITIONS, AND THE AMOUNT RECEIVED UNDER ONE OF THE TWO POSITIONS CONSTITUTES A PROPER CHARGE AGAINST ANY AMOUNT DUE THE EMPLOYEE BY THE UNITED STATES AND MAY BE SET OFF AGAINST ANY CREDITS OF THE EMPLOYEE IN THE RETIREMENT FUND.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, DECEMBER 9, 1924:

THERE HAS BEEN RECEIVED YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 1, 1924, TRANSMITTING FOR DECISION THE RECORD IN THE CASE OF FRANK T. HOLMES, WHO HAS APPLIED FOR REFUND OF RETIREMENT DEDUCTIONS MADE FROM HIS PAY AS A LABORER IN THE NEW YORK POST OFFICE FROM JANUARY 5, 1922, TO APRIL 5, 1922. THE COMMISSIONER OF PENSIONS HAS FOUND THAT THERE IS TO THE CREDIT OF THE CLAIMANT IN THE RETIREMENT FUND, $7.47. IT APPEARS, HOWEVER, THAT DURING THE PERIOD JANUARY 5, 1922, TO JANUARY 10, 1922, CLAIMANT DREW TWO SALARIES, RECEIVING $22.78 AS A RIGGER, NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, WHICH WAS AT THE RATE OF $5.84 PER DAY, OR $1,524.24 PER ANNUM (FIVE-DAY-WEEK BASIS); AND $21.23 FOR THE SAME PERIOD AS A LABORER IN THE NEW YORK POST OFFICE, WHICH WAS AT THE ANNUAL RATE OF $1,350 PER ANNUM.

THE CLAIMANT WAS NOTIFIED OF THE EXCESS PAYMENT AND REQUESTED TO REFUND THE $21.23, THE LESSER OF THE TWO SALARIES, BUT HAS OBJECTED THERETO, STATING:

IN REPLY TO YOUR LETTER RECEIVED OCTOBER 2, DATED AUG. 19, 1924, IN REFERENCE TO MY CLAIM FOR MONEY DEDUCTED FROM MY PAY WHILE EMPLOYED AS LABORER AT THE NEW YORK POST OFFICE, IN WHICH YOU STATE THAT I WAS EMPLOYED IN TWO PLACES AT ONE TIME, IT IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS.

MY SERVICE AS RIGGER AT THE NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, TERMINATED ON THE MORNING OF JAN 4, 1922, WHEN I PRESENTED MY RESIGNATION AND RECEIVED MY DISCHARGE AND PAY. AT THAT TIME I HAD EARNED AND COMING TO ME, 5 OR 6 DAYS' VACATION. NOW PLEASE DON-T LOSE SIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THAT VACATION WAS EARNED BEFORE JAN. 5, 1922. AT THE TIME OF MY DISCHARGE JAN. 4, I WAS GIVEN PAY IN LIEU OF VACATION.

IF AS YOU STATE THE BOOK SHOWS THAT I RECEIVED PAY FROM TWO PLACES AT ONE TIME, IT IS SIMPLY A CASE THAT THE METHOD OF BOOKKEEPING IN THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE SHOWS ME HOLDING DOWN TWO JOBS AT ONE TIME.

TECHNICALLY THAT MAY BE TRUE, BUT IN FACT IT IS NOT, BECAUSE FROM THE TIME I PRESENTED MY RESIGNATION AND RECEIVED MY DISCHARGE AND PAY FROM THE NAVY YARD, BROOKLYN, ON JAN 4, 1922, I WAS NO NEARER THAN 8 MILES FROM THIS PLACE, SO HOW COULD I BE EMPLOYED HERE.

THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT FROM THE COMMANDER OF THE NAVY YARD IS AS FOLLOWS:

AS REQUESTED IN YOUR LETTER ACM-R OF JUNE 17, 1924, YOU ARE ADVISED THAT FRANK T. HOLMES RIGGER, $5.84 PER DIEM, WAS PAID FOR 4 DAYS' LEAVE WITH PAY FOR JANUARY 5, 6, 9 AND 10, 1922. ON JANUARY 7, 1922, THE NAVY YARD WAS CLOSED AS THE 5 DAYS A WEEK SCHEDULE WAS IN EFFECT.

IT IS IMMATERIAL THAT HOLMES' RIGHT TO THE LEAVE WITH PAY WAS EARNED PRIOR TO JANUARY 5, 1922; THE FACT NEVERTHELESS REMAINS THAT HE WAS PAID FOR THE PERIOD FROM JANUARY 5 TO 10, INCLUSIVE, TWO SALARIES EXCEEDING IN THE AGGREGATE THE ANNUAL RATE OF $2,000, THUS CONTRAVENING THE ACT OF MAY 10, 1916, 39 STAT. 120, AS AMENDED BY THE ACT OF AUGUST 29, 1916, 39 STAT. 582.

THE CLAIMANT HAVING BEEN OVERPAID $21.23, WHICH IS IN EXCESS OF THE AMOUNT FOUND DUE HIM ON ACCOUNT OF RETIREMENT DEDUCTIONS, THE AMOUNT TO HIS CREDIT IN THE RETIREMENT FUND SHOULD BE APPLIED TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF HIS INDEBTEDNESS TO THE UNITED STATES ON ACCOUNT OF SUCH OVERPAYMENT OF SALARY, BY PAYING SAID AMOUNT TO THE POSTMASTER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES FOR DEPOSIT TO THE CREDIT OF THE APPROPRIATION FROM WHICH ORIGINALLY PAID. 3 COMP. GEN. 86; 37 MS. COMP. GEN. 774.