B-125655, NOV. 17, 1955

B-125655: Nov 17, 1955

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ADMINISTRATION: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 21. THE AMOUNTS COVERED BY THE VOUCHERS WERE WITHHELD BECAUSE OF A DETERMINATION THAT THE TWO EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS "RESIDENT" STAFF MEMBERS FROM THE DATES OF THEIR RESPECTIVE MARRIAGES. STATIONED OR RESIDENT IN THE AREA SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE A DIFFERENTIAL WHEN THE AGENCY CONCERNED DETERMINES THAT THE SPOUSE'S PRESENCE THERE IS PRIMARILY IN ORDER TO BE WITH SUCH INDIVIDUAL AND NOT FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT.' 1 FSM PART IV. OR WHO WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR TRANSFER ONLY TO POSTS IN AN AREA TO WHICH THEIR HUSBANDS ARE TRANSFERRED.'. THAT SHE WAS RECRUITED AS A REGULAR STAFF MEMBER.

B-125655, NOV. 17, 1955

TO MR. ANTONE B. OLEJNICZAK, AUTHORIZED CERTIFYING OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION ADMINISTRATION:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 21, 1955, FORWARDED HERE BY LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1955, FROM THE DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL, REQUESTING OUR DECISION WHETHER YOU MAY CERTIFY FOR PAYMENT SUPPLEMENTAL PAYROLL VOUCHERS NOS. 1, 2, AND 3, THEREWITH ENCLOSED, COVERING POST DIFFERENTIAL TO GENE WORLEY HINZE FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 2, 1953, TO DECEMBER 18, 1954, AND YVONE WOOD TOOD FOR THE PERIOD OCTOBER 12, 1952, TO DECEMBER 18, 1954. THE AMOUNTS COVERED BY THE VOUCHERS WERE WITHHELD BECAUSE OF A DETERMINATION THAT THE TWO EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE CLASSIFIED AS "RESIDENT" STAFF MEMBERS FROM THE DATES OF THEIR RESPECTIVE MARRIAGES--- RESIDENT STAFF MEMBERS, AS DISTINGUISHED FROM REGULAR STAFF MEMBERS, NOT BEING ENTITLED TO POST DIFFERENTIAL UNDER APPLICABLE REGULATIONS.

SECTION 116.2 OF THE STANDARDIZED REGULATIONS (GOVERNMENT CIVILIAN, FOREIGN AREAS) PROVIDES:

"A. THE SPOUSE OF A PERSON EMPLOYED, STATIONED OR RESIDENT IN THE AREA SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE A DIFFERENTIAL WHEN THE AGENCY CONCERNED DETERMINES THAT THE SPOUSE'S PRESENCE THERE IS PRIMARILY IN ORDER TO BE WITH SUCH INDIVIDUAL AND NOT FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT.'

1 FSM PART IV, SECTION 371.32 (A) PROVIDES THAT DIFFERENTIAL SHALL NOT BE PAID TO STAFF OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES DESIGNATED AS "RESIDENT" STAFF EMPLOYEES, WITH THE REFERENCE TO 1 FSM IV, 114. SECTION 114.4 (B) OF THE FOREIGN SERVICE MANUAL PROVIDES "EXAMPLES OF RESIDENT STAFF PERSONNEL" AS FOLLOWS:

"/B) WIVES OF UNITED STATES CITIZENS EMPLOYED IN PRIVATE INDUSTRY OR GOVERNMENT (INCLUDING THE WIVES OF FOREIGN SERVICE EMPLOYEES) WHO MIGHT REASONABLY BE EXPECTED TO REMAIN AT THE POST ONLY FOR THE DURATION OF THEIR HUSBAND'S EMPLOYMENT THERE, OR WHO WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR TRANSFER ONLY TO POSTS IN AN AREA TO WHICH THEIR HUSBANDS ARE TRANSFERRED.'

MRS. TODD IN LETTER DATED DECEMBER 22, 1954, CONTENDS THAT SHE SHOULD NOT BE CLASSIFIED AS A RESIDENT STAFF MEMBER; THAT SHE WAS RECRUITED AS A REGULAR STAFF MEMBER; THAT HER HUSBAND IS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BUT IS PERMANENTLY STATIONED AT SONGKHLA, THAILAND, SOME 600 MILES FROM BANGKOK, BUT THAT SHE HAS ELECTED TO REMAIN IN HER POSITION AS SECRETARY TO THE USCM DIRECTOR IN BANGKOK FOR PERSONAL REASONS.

A COMMUNICATION DATED AUGUST 31, 1954, FROM THE DIRECTOR OF THE MISSION AT BANGKOK STATES CONCERNING BOTH MRS. TODD AND MRS. HINZE THAT "THEIR PRESENCE AT THIS POST IS FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT," WHICH APPEARS TO SATISFY THE ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION REQUIRED BY SECTION 116.2 OF THE STANDARDIZED REGULATIONS, SUPRA. THERE IS NO OTHER EXPLANATION OR COMMENT IN THE RECORD REGARDING THE CASE OF MRS. HINZE EXCEPT A STATEMENT IN THE LETTER OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1955, FROM THE DIRECTOR OF PERSONNEL THAT THE "CLAIM OF GENE WORLEY HINZE * * * IS BELIEVED IDENTICAL.'

IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT MRS. TODD HAS ELECTED NOT TO ACCOMPANY HER HUSBAND TO HIS PERMANENT DUTY STATION BUT, RATHER, TO REMAIN IN HER POSITION AT BANGKOK, AND SINCE HER RESIDENCE AT BANGKOK HAS BEEN CERTIFIED AS BEING FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT, IT WOULD APPEAR THAT SHE PROPERLY MAY BE CONSIDERED AS A REGULAR STAFF MEMBER AND IN THAT CAPACITY SHE WOULD BE ENTITLED TO POST DIFFERENTIAL.

NO DECISION CAN BE RENDERED REGARDING MRS. HINZE IN THE ABSENCE OF A FULL DISCLOSURE OF FACTS APPLICABLE TO HER CASE. HOWEVER, IF THE FACTS IN HER CASE ARE IDENTICAL WITH THOSE OF MRS. TODD, THAT IS TO SAY, IF SHE IS LIVING APART AND A CONSIDERABLE DISTANCE FROM HER HUSBAND'S PERMANENT DUTY STATION, SHE ALSO WOULD BE ENTITLED TO THE POST DIFFERENTIAL.

THE PAYROLL VOUCHERS WHICH ARE RETURNED HEREWITH MAY BE CERTIFIED FOR PAYMENT ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOREGOING.