B-105327 September 21, 1951

B-105327: Sep 21, 1951

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

Caballes: Reference is made to your letter of June 26. Was based upon two periods of service. From the date Manila was reoccupied by U.S. forces up to May 1948. You were laid off in a reduction in force. You claim for the 26 days annual and 15 days sick leave allegedly due you was disallowed in the settlement based upon the Department of Army report that employees in positions under a native wage scale in the Philippines are not subject to the provissions of the leave acts of March 14. The Army commands outside the United States were. " to "conform to the local prevailing practices established by law or custom in the area" in which the alien and native personnel are employed. It is to be noted.

B-105327 September 21, 1951

Mr. Mariano T. Caballes 441 Merced Street Pace, Manila Republic of the Philippines

Dear Mr. Caballes:

Reference is made to your letter of June 26, 1951, relative to Office settlement dated June 7, 1950, which disallowed your claim for annual and sick leave allegedly due you as a former employee of the United States Army, Engineer Corps, Fort Santiago, in the Philippines.

Your claim, dated December 1, 1949, was based upon two periods of service, namely, from November 1941 to the date of occupation of Manila by japanese forces in 1942, and from the date Manila was reoccupied by U.S. forces up to May 1948, when, you state, you were laid off in a reduction in force. Howevery, you claim for the 26 days annual and 15 days sick leave allegedly due you was disallowed in the settlement based upon the Department of Army report that employees in positions under a native wage scale in the Philippines are not subject to the provissions of the leave acts of March 14, 1936, 49 Stat. 1161, 1162. Also, while lnot referred to in the settlement, Executive Order No. 941, effective January 1, 1944, expressly precluded from the said acts benefits and leave rights the "alien and native labor employed outside the continental limits of the United States."

That Executive order, issued pursuant to law, has the force and effect of law and authorized the departments and agencies having installations overseas to promulgate the leave regulations applicable to their oversears employees. Pursuant thereto, and in accordance with the Army civilian personnel regulations quoted in yuour letter of June 26, the Army commands outside the United States were, "as closely as practicable," to "conform to the local prevailing practices established by law or custom in the area" in which the alien and native personnel are employed. It is to be noted, however, that neither of the foregoing authorities conferred a vested statutory right upon such personnel so as to entitle them to leave privileges identical or equivelant in amount to those of the regular employees who had been ordered from the United States to duty stations in the Philippines.

You indicate that based upon current regulations employees of your class now are being granted annual leave with pay. Doubtless the local regulations now in effect were promulgated subsequent to your separation from service in May 1948, and the fact that they were not in effect prior to your separation does not justify the conclusion, as expressed by you, that you were entitled to accumulate leave from and after the date of War Department Orders C dated June 6, 1946, and Civilian Personnel Regulations 75.5-6, cited by you. Clearly, tthat order and the regulations did not prescribe andy specific amount of leave to be granted employees of your class; hence, it must be held that employees of your class were not authorized to accrue any leave except such as lawfully might be authorized by the Army commander in the Philippines. Thus, since it appears the Far East Command authorization of leave was not issued prior to your separations from service, botoh in 1942 and in 1948, it does not appear that you were entitled to accumulate any leave credit upon which payment now could be made under current leave laws

In view of kthe foregoing and based upon the present record, the settlement of June 7, 1950, disallowing your said claim, must be and is sustained.

Very truly yours,

Lindsay C. Warren Comptroller General of the United States