B-163404, FEB. 5, 1968

B-163404: Feb 5, 1968

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

EMPLOYEE WHO CLAIMS ERROR WITH RESPECT TO GRADE OF POSITION TENDERED BY AGENCY BUT RECORD DOES NOT SUBSTANTIATE THAT OFFER WAS MADE AT HIGHER GRADE OR THAT EMPLOYEE OCCUPIED OR PERFORMED DUTIES OF HIGHER GRADE MAY NOT HAVE CLAIM ALLOWED. WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR THE DIFFERENCE IN SALARY RATES BETWEEN THAT OF POSITION IN GRADE GS-9 AND THAT OF THE POSITION TO WHICH YOU WERE APPOINTED IN GRADE GS-7. YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED FOR THE REASONS STATED IN OUR OFFICE SETTLEMENT WHICH NEED NOT BE REPEATED HERE. WHICH WAS SHOWN THEREIN AS GRADE GS-9. YOU WOULD NOT HAVE MOVED FROM GRAND FORKS. THAT PREMISE IS NOT NECESSARILY CONSISTENT WITH THE RECORD IN YOUR CASE WHICH SHOWS THAT YOUR CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBILITY BY THE UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION.

B-163404, FEB. 5, 1968

COMPENSATION - HIGHER GRADE DECISION TO EMPLOYEE OF SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE SUSTAINING DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIM FOR DIFFERENCE IN SALARY RATES BETWEEN GS-9 AND GS-7. EMPLOYEE WHO CLAIMS ERROR WITH RESPECT TO GRADE OF POSITION TENDERED BY AGENCY BUT RECORD DOES NOT SUBSTANTIATE THAT OFFER WAS MADE AT HIGHER GRADE OR THAT EMPLOYEE OCCUPIED OR PERFORMED DUTIES OF HIGHER GRADE MAY NOT HAVE CLAIM ALLOWED.

TO MR. MELVYN D. OLSON:

YOUR LETTER OF JANUARY 10, 1968, REQUESTS OUR REVIEW OF GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE SETTLEMENT OF DECEMBER 12, 1967, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR THE DIFFERENCE IN SALARY RATES BETWEEN THAT OF POSITION IN GRADE GS-9 AND THAT OF THE POSITION TO WHICH YOU WERE APPOINTED IN GRADE GS-7, $7,050 PER ANNUM, DURING THE PERIOD JUNE 21, 1965, THROUGH JUNE 20, 1966, AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, POCATELLO, IDAHO.

YOUR CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED FOR THE REASONS STATED IN OUR OFFICE SETTLEMENT WHICH NEED NOT BE REPEATED HERE.

IN YOUR REQUEST FOR REVIEW WE UNDERSTAND YOUR PREMISE TO BE THAT HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR THE ERROR WITH RESPECT TO THE GRADE OF THE POSITION TENDERED BY THE AGENCY IN ITS LETTER TO YOU OF JUNE 1, 1965, WHICH WAS SHOWN THEREIN AS GRADE GS-9, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE MOVED FROM GRAND FORKS, NORTH DAKOTA, TO POCATELLO, IDAHO, A DISTANCE OF SOME 1,200 MILES, TO ACCEPT A GRADE GS-7 POSITION.

THAT PREMISE IS NOT NECESSARILY CONSISTENT WITH THE RECORD IN YOUR CASE WHICH SHOWS THAT YOUR CERTIFICATE OF ELIGIBILITY BY THE UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, DATED MAY 12, 1965, WAS FOR A GRADE GS-7 POSITION, THAT YOUR STATEMENT OF AVAILABILITY, DATED MAY 18, 1965, WAS FOR A GRADE GS-7 POSITION AT $7,050 PER ANNUM AND THAT YOU ACTUALLY WERE APPOINTED TO AND ACCEPTED BY ENTRANCE ON DUTY A GRADE GS 7 POSITION, $7,050 PER ANNUM ON JUNE 21, 1965, AT POCATELLO, IDAHO. THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT AT ANY TIME DURING THE PERIOD IN QUESTION THAT YOU OCCUPIED OR PERFORMED THE DUTIES OF OTHER THAN A GS-7 POSITION.

WE NOTE THAT YOU NOW CLAIM EITHER THE SALARY OF A GRADE GS-9 POSITION OR DAMAGES MEASURED BY THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY YOU FOR CERTAIN TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION, AND LOSS OF EMPLOYMENT FOR 2 MONTHS DUE TO RELOCATION, AGGREGATING SOME $2,700, PURPORTEDLY RESULTING FROM THE TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR BY AN OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE APPEARING IN ITS LETTER OF JUNE 1, 1965.

IT IS AN ESTABLISHED RULE OF LAW THAT, ABSENT A SPECIFIC AUTHORIZING STATUTE, THE UNITED STATES, AS SOVEREIGN, MAY NOT BE OBLIGATED OR MADE LIABLE FOR THE ERRONEOUS OR UNAUTHORIZED ACTS OF ITS OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES.

EVEN IF IT BE CONCEDED THAT YOU WERE INDUCED TO MOVE TO POCATELLO, IDAHO, SOLELY BECAUSE OF THE TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR IN THE AGENCY'S LETTER TO YOU OF JUNE 1, 1965, A CONCLUSION WHICH IS NOT EVIDENT FROM THE FACTS IN YOUR CASE, WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORITY WHICH WOULD PERMIT THE FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION OF YOUR CLAIM BY OUR OFFICE.

THEREFORE, UPON REVIEW WE MUST SUSTAIN THE CONCLUSION REACHED IN OUR OFFICE SETTLEMENT OF DECEMBER 12, 1967, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM.

FOR YOUR INFORMATION THE GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE MUST SETTLE CLAIMS UPON THE BASIS OF THE WRITTEN RECORD BEFORE IT. THE LAW DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR THE SETTLEMENT BY OUR OFFICE OF CLAIMS UPON THE BASIS OF ORAL HEARINGS. FURTHER, YOU ARE ADVISED THAT OUR DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS ARE FINAL AND CONCLUSIVE WITH RESPECT TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT. THEY DO NOT PRECLUDE A CLAIMANT FROM PURSUING WHATEVER REMEDIES HE MAY HAVE IN THE COURTS.