B-161289, AUG. 2, 1967
Highlights
WHILE THERE WAS NO BASIS FOR RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF AGENCY'S REVISED COST-OF-LIVING RETENTION POLICY IN SUCH CONVERSION CASES TO COMPENSATE EMPLOYEES THE EMPLOYEES MAY BE ALLOWED AN ADJUSTMENT OF SAVED PAY TO INCLUDE THE COST-OF-LIVING ALLOWANCE FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE NEW POLICY. THAT DECISION CONCERNED TWO EMPLOYEES OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION'S ALASKAN REGION WHOSE POSITIONS WERE CONVERTED. YOU SAY THAT AS A RESULT THE TWO EMPLOYEES HAVE RECEIVED A DECREASE IN GROSS COMPENSATION APPROXIMATELY EQUAL TO THE 25 PERCENT COST-OF-LIVING ALLOWANCE THEY RECEIVED AS CLASSIFICATION ACT EMPLOYEES. A RESULT WHICH WAS UNINTENDED AT THE TIME THE CONVERSION WAS MADE. IN OUR DECISION IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT.
B-161289, AUG. 2, 1967
COMPENSATION - SAVED PAY DECISION TO FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATOR RE CONVERSION OF POSITIONS OF TWO EMPLOYEES IN ALASKA FROM CLASSIFICATION ACT TO WAGE BOARD AND RESULTANT DECREASE IN COST-OF-LIVING ALLOWANCE. WHILE THERE WAS NO BASIS FOR RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF AGENCY'S REVISED COST-OF-LIVING RETENTION POLICY IN SUCH CONVERSION CASES TO COMPENSATE EMPLOYEES THE EMPLOYEES MAY BE ALLOWED AN ADJUSTMENT OF SAVED PAY TO INCLUDE THE COST-OF-LIVING ALLOWANCE FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE NEW POLICY.
TO THE HONORABLE WILLIAM F. MCKEE, ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION:
THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER OF JUNE 16, 1967, CONCERNING OUR DECISION OF MAY 10, 1967, B-161289, ADDRESSED TO AN AUTHORIZED CERTIFYING OFFICER OF YOUR AGENCY.
THAT DECISION CONCERNED TWO EMPLOYEES OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION'S ALASKAN REGION WHOSE POSITIONS WERE CONVERTED, WITHOUT CHANGE OF DUTIES, FROM CLASSIFICATION ACT TO WAGE BOARD AT THE TIME WHEN FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION REGULATIONS DID NOT PROVIDE, AS THEY NOW DO, FOR THE INCLUSION OF COST-OF-LIVING ALLOWANCES AS A PART OF THE COMPENSATION AUTHORIZED TO BE SAVED OR RETAINED ON SUCH CONVERSION. YOU SAY THAT AS A RESULT THE TWO EMPLOYEES HAVE RECEIVED A DECREASE IN GROSS COMPENSATION APPROXIMATELY EQUAL TO THE 25 PERCENT COST-OF-LIVING ALLOWANCE THEY RECEIVED AS CLASSIFICATION ACT EMPLOYEES, A RESULT WHICH WAS UNINTENDED AT THE TIME THE CONVERSION WAS MADE. IN OUR DECISION IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT, INASMUCH AS THE CONVERSIONS WERE EFFECTED UNDER A VALID POLICY IN FORCE AT THE TIME, THERE IS NO BASIS FOR A RETROACTIVE APPLICATION OF THE AGENCY'S REVISED COST-OF-LIVING RETENTION POLICY IN SUCH CONVERSIONS SO AS TO COMPENSATE THESE TWO EMPLOYEES FROM THE DATE THEIR POSITIONS WERE CONVERTED AS THOUGH THE REVISED POLICY HAD BEEN IN EFFECT FROM THAT DATE.
YOU NOW REQUEST A FURTHER DECISION AS TO WHETHER WE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO OBJECT IF YOUR AGENCY WERE TO APPLY ITS REVISED POLICY TO THOSE TWO EMPLOYEES, PROSPECTIVELY, FOR THE REMAINDER OF THEIR SALARY RETENTION PERIOD, EITHER (A) FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE REVISED POLICY, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE PAY PERIODS DURING WHICH THE EMPLOYEES' WORK ALREADY HAS BEEN PERFORMED AND COMPENSATED, OR (B) FROM A FUTURE DATE.
WHILE THE POLICY IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF THE CONVERSION OF THE TWO EMPLOYEES PROHIBITED INCLUDING IN THE SAVED PAY A COST-OF-LIVING ALLOWANCE, WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY BASIS FOR NOT ALLOWING SUCH EMPLOYEES THE SAME BENEFITS AS THOSE EMPLOYEES WHO ARE CONVERTED SUBSEQUENT TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POLICY.
THEREFORE, AND SINCE WE UNDERSTAND IT HAS BEEN ADMINISTRATIVELY DETERMINED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PUBLIC INTEREST, WE WOULD NOT OBJECT TO THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE SAVED PAY OF THE TWO EMPLOYEES TO INCLUDE THE COST-OF-LIVING ALLOWANCE FROM THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE NEW POLICY.