B-166622, MAY 9, 1969

B-166622: May 9, 1969

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

IS ENTITLED TO PAYMENT OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION FOR HOURS OF TRAVEL PERFORMED OUTSIDE OF HIS REGULARLY SCHEDULED WORKWEEK. HOPPEL IS EMPLOYED AS A BANK EXAMINER AT THE DISTRICT OFFICE IN COLUMBUS. SINCE THE EXAMINATION WAS SCHEDULED TO COMMENCE AT 8 A.M. IT WAS NECESSARY FOR MR. THE EXAMINATION WAS COMPLETED ON FRIDAY. HOPPEL WAS SCHEDULED TO WORK FROM 8 A.M. HIS CLAIM IS BASED UPON 5 U.S.C. 5542 (B) (2) WHICH PROVIDES. AS FOLLOWS: "/2) TIME SPENT IN A TRAVEL STATUS AWAY FROM THE OFFICIAL-DUTY STATION OF AN EMPLOYEE IS NOT HOURS OF EMPLOYMENT UNLESS. YOU EXPLAIN THAT MOST DISTRICT OFFICES OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION HAVE BEEN DIVIDED INTO SEVERAL SUBDISTRICT OFFICES. IT WAS NECESSARY FOR MR.

B-166622, MAY 9, 1969

TO MR. RANDALL:

WE REFER TO YOUR LETTER OF APRIL 7, 1969, WITH ENCLOSURES, REQUESTING OUR DECISION WHETHER MR. MAYNARD HOPPEL, AN EMPLOYEE OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, IS ENTITLED TO PAYMENT OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION FOR HOURS OF TRAVEL PERFORMED OUTSIDE OF HIS REGULARLY SCHEDULED WORKWEEK.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT MR. HOPPEL IS EMPLOYED AS A BANK EXAMINER AT THE DISTRICT OFFICE IN COLUMBUS, OHIO. AT THE TIME IN QUESTION MR. HOPPEL HAD BEEN ASSIGNED TO PERFORM AN EXAMINATION OF A BANK IN HICKSVILLE, OHIO. SINCE THE EXAMINATION WAS SCHEDULED TO COMMENCE AT 8 A.M. ON MONDAY, JULY 8, 1968, IT WAS NECESSARY FOR MR. HOPPEL TO TRAVEL TO HICKSVILLE ON SUNDAY, JULY 7. THE EXAMINATION WAS COMPLETED ON FRIDAY, JULY 12, AND MR. HOPPEL COMMENCED HIS RETURN TRAVEL TO COLUMBUS ON THAT EVENING AT 4:30 P.M. APPARENTLY, MR. HOPPEL WAS SCHEDULED TO WORK FROM 8 A.M. TO 4:30 P.M., MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY.

MR. HOPPEL HAS REQUESTED PAYMENT OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION FOR THE 9 HOURS INVOLVED IN TRAVELING TO AND FROM HICKSVILLE. HIS CLAIM IS BASED UPON 5 U.S.C. 5542 (B) (2) WHICH PROVIDES, IN PERTINENT PART, AS FOLLOWS:

"/2) TIME SPENT IN A TRAVEL STATUS AWAY FROM THE OFFICIAL-DUTY STATION OF AN EMPLOYEE IS NOT HOURS OF EMPLOYMENT UNLESS---

"/B) THE TRAVEL * * * (IV) RESULTS FROM AN EVENT WHICH COULD NOT BE SCHEDULED OR CONTROLLED ADMINISTRATIVELY.'

YOU EXPLAIN THAT MOST DISTRICT OFFICES OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION HAVE BEEN DIVIDED INTO SEVERAL SUBDISTRICT OFFICES. HOWEVER, AT THE TIME OF MR. HOPPEL'S CLAIM THE COLUMBUS DISTRICT HAD NOT BEEN SO SUBDIVIDED AND, THEREFORE, IT WAS NECESSARY FOR MR. HOPPEL AND OTHER EXAMINERS OF THE COLUMBUS OFFICE TO PERFORM A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TRAVEL IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR WORK.

WITH RESPECT TO THE SCHEDULING OF BANK EXAMINATIONS YOU PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION:

"IN ORDER TO OBTAIN EFFECTIVE CONTROL AND SECURE MAXIMUM UTILIZATION OF LIMITED MANPOWER RESOURCES, TRADITIONALLY MANY BANK EXAMINATIONS ARE STARTED AT THE OPENING OR CLOSING HOUR OF THE BANK. THE SUPERVISING EXAMINER HAS AUTHORITY TO AND DOES MAKE THAT DETERMINATION. OBVIOUSLY, ON MONDAY MORNING STARTS IT IS NECESSARY TO TRAVEL TO THE CITY WHERE THE BANK IS LOCATED ON SUNDAY EVENING OR EARLY MONDAY MORNING. * * *"

SUBSECTION 5542 (B) (2) QUOTED IN PART ABOVE PROVIDES AN EXCEPTION TO THE GENERAL RULE THAT TRAVEL OUTSIDE OF AN EMPLOYEE'S SCHEDULED WORKWEEK DOES NOT CONSTITUTE HOURS OF EMPLOYMENT. FEDERAL PERSONNEL MANUAL LETTER NO. 550-52, ISSUED BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 5, 1969, CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IN EXPLANATION OF THAT STATUTORY EXCEPTION:

"* * * TRAVEL WILL BE CONSIDERED HOURS OF WORK WHEN IT RESULTS FROM UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES (E.G., A BREAKDOWN OF EQUIPMENT), OR FROM AN EVENT WHICH IS SCHEDULED OR CONTROLLED BY SOMEONE OR SOME ORGANIZATION OUTSIDE OF GOVERNMENT.'

IN THE PRESENT CASE IT IS CLEAR THAT THE EXAMINATION WHICH MR. HOPPEL WAS ASSIGNED TO PERFORM AT HICKSVILLE, OHIO, WAS SCHEDULED AND CONTROLLED BY HIS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE. THEREFORE, THE TRAVEL PERFORMED INCIDENT THERETO DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE STATUTORY EXCEPTION DISCUSSED ABOVE. ACCORDINGLY, THE EMPLOYEE IS NOT ENTITLED TO PAYMENT OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION FOR SUCH TRAVEL TIME.