B-152671, NOV. 19, 1963

B-152671: Nov 19, 1963

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

WAS GIVEN A NOTIFICATION OF REDUCTION IN FORCE ON JANUARY 5. HE WAS OFFERED A POSITION AS SUPERVISORY GENERAL SUPPLY CLERK. THE REASON FOR THE REDUCTION IN FORCE WAS STATED AS "REORGANIZATION FOLLOWING TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS TO NAD. WHERE HE IS STILL EMPLOYED. HIS CLAIM IS FOR SALARY ADJUSTMENT FOR THE PERIOD OF TWO YEARS BEGINNING FEBRUARY 8. THE MATTER WAS REFERRED TO OUR CLAIMS DIVISION APPARENTLY BECAUSE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION EXISTED AS TO WHETHER SUCH TRANSFER FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE SHOULD BE REGARDED AS A TRANSFER WITHIN THE SAME DEPARTMENT AND WHETHER THE REDUCED SALARY IN THIS CASE WAS DUE TO A TRANSFER RATHER THAN A REDUCTION IN FORCE.

B-152671, NOV. 19, 1963

TO AIR FORCE ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE CENTER:

THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER OF AUGUST 21, 1963, REFERENCE AJC, WITH WHICH YOU FORWARDED FOR APPROPRIATE ACTION THE CLAIM OF RICHARD H. GROVES FOR SALARY RETENTION PAY INCIDENT TO HIS EMPLOYMENT AT THE BLYTHEVILLE AIR FORCE BASE.

IT APPEARS THAT MR. GROVES, A SUPERVISORY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, GS-12, STEP 2, AT THE NAVAL AMMUNITION DEPOT, SHUMAKER, ARKANSAS, WAS GIVEN A NOTIFICATION OF REDUCTION IN FORCE ON JANUARY 5, 1960, TO BE EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 7, 1960. HE WAS OFFERED A POSITION AS SUPERVISORY GENERAL SUPPLY CLERK, GS-6, STEP 7. THE REASON FOR THE REDUCTION IN FORCE WAS STATED AS "REORGANIZATION FOLLOWING TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS TO NAD, MCALESTER, OKLAHOMA.' THE NOTIFICATION CONTAINED NO STATEMENT CONCERNING RETENTION OF PAY.

MR. GROVES DID NOT ACCEPT THE GS-6 POSITION BUT INSTEAD ACCEPTED A POSITION AS SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL SPECIALIST, GS-11, STEP 6, WITH THE UNITED STATES AIR FORCE, BLYTHEVILLE, EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 8, 1960, WHERE HE IS STILL EMPLOYED. HIS CLAIM IS FOR SALARY ADJUSTMENT FOR THE PERIOD OF TWO YEARS BEGINNING FEBRUARY 8, 1960, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 507 OF THE CLASSIFICATION ACT OF 1949, AS AMENDED, 5 U.S.C. 1107.

THE MATTER WAS REFERRED TO OUR CLAIMS DIVISION APPARENTLY BECAUSE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION EXISTED AS TO WHETHER SUCH TRANSFER FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE SHOULD BE REGARDED AS A TRANSFER WITHIN THE SAME DEPARTMENT AND WHETHER THE REDUCED SALARY IN THIS CASE WAS DUE TO A TRANSFER RATHER THAN A REDUCTION IN FORCE.

CONCERNING THE MATTER OF SEPARATE DEPARTMENTS WE HAVE PLACED IN THE FILE A COPY OF THE UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION LETTER NO. 59-14, SUPPLEMENT NO. 2, DATED SEPTEMBER 23, 1959, IN WHICH IT IS STATED THAT MOVEMENTS OF EMPLOYEES BETWEEN THE MILITARY DEPARTMENTS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE ARE NOT CONSIDERED TO BE MOVEMENTS BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS BUT THE EMPLOYEES ARE CONSIDERED AS BEING IN THE SAME DEPARTMENT FOR PURPOSES OF THE SALARY RETENTION STATUTE AND REGULATIONS.

THE REDUCTION IN GRADE AND SALARY OF THE EMPLOYEE WAS THE RESULT OF A REDUCTION IN FORCE AND REORGANIZATION AT THE NAVAL AMMUNITION DEPOT AT SHUMAKER, FOLLOWING A TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS TO ANOTHER INSTALLATION. THE EMPLOYEE CHOSE THE HIGHER OF TWO LOWER GRADE POSITIONS AVAILABLE TO HIM, WHICH WAS NECESSITATED BY SUCH REDUCTION IN FORCE.

THE CLAIM AND SUPPORTING PAPERS ARE RETURNED HEREWITH. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES WE WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO OBJECT TO PAYMENT THEREOF IF IT IS CORRECT IN OTHER RESPECTS.