B-174784, FEB 25, 1972

B-174784: Feb 25, 1972

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

SINCE CLAIMANT WAS FULLY ADVISED. THERE IS NO AUTHORITY TO ALLOW HIS CLAIM. YOUR CLAIM FOR OVERTIME COMPENSATION WAS DISALLOWED ON THE GROUND THAT OVERTIME HAD NOT BEEN AUTHORIZED OR APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS OF THE AIR FORCE. YOU SAY THAT YOU WERE APPOINTED AS A TEAM CHIEF AND PRIOR TO DEPARTURE ON JANUARY 24. YOU ATTENDED A MEETING WITH MANAGEMENT AT WHICH TIME THERE WERE DISCUSSED THE DUTY HOURS AND OVERTIME FOR THE PROJECT. YOU SAY YOU WERE ADVISED TO ADJUST YOUR SCHEDULE TO CONFORM WITH WORK REQUIREMENTS AFTER REVIEWING THE SITUATION AT A COUPLE OF AIR BASES. YOU WERE THEN TO NOTIFY MANAGEMENT AT HILL AIR FORCE BASE. BECAUSE OF CERTAIN DIFFICULTIES YOU SAY YOU WERE UNABLE TO GET A MESSAGE THROUGH TO THE PROPER AUTHORITIES TO NOTIFY THEM OF THE REQUIRED OVERTIME NEEDED TO EXPEDITIOUSLY COMPLETE THE PROJECT.

B-174784, FEB 25, 1972

CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE - OVERTIME - REIMBURSEMENT DECISION SUSTAINING PRIOR DENIAL OF A CLAIM OF CHARLES R. SOKOLIK FOR OVERTIME COMPENSATION PERFORMED WHILE ON TEMPORARY DUTY AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE AIR FORCE. THE PROVISIONS OF AFM 40-1, SECTION 5232, PARAGRAPH 2, REQUIRE WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION PRIOR TO THE PERFORMANCE OF OVERTIME WORK. SINCE CLAIMANT WAS FULLY ADVISED, PRIOR TO ENTERING ON TEMPORARY DUTY, OF THIS REQUIREMENT, THERE IS NO AUTHORITY TO ALLOW HIS CLAIM.

TO MR. CHARLES R. SOKOLIK:

THIS REFERS TO YOUR LETTER OF OCTOBER 14, 1971, REQUESTING REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 29, 1971, OF THE CLAIMS DIVISION OF THIS OFFICE WHICH DENIED YOUR CLAIM FOR OVERTIME COMPENSATION FOR 65 HOURS OF WORK PERFORMED DURING THE PERIOD JANUARY 31, 1971, THROUGH FEBRUARY 22, 1971, WHILE ON TEMPORARY DUTY IN SOUTHEAST ASIA AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE.

YOUR CLAIM FOR OVERTIME COMPENSATION WAS DISALLOWED ON THE GROUND THAT OVERTIME HAD NOT BEEN AUTHORIZED OR APPROVED BY THE PROPER OFFICIALS OF THE AIR FORCE. YOU SAY THAT YOU WERE APPOINTED AS A TEAM CHIEF AND PRIOR TO DEPARTURE ON JANUARY 24, 1971, FROM HILL AIR FORCE BASE, UTAH, YOU ATTENDED A MEETING WITH MANAGEMENT AT WHICH TIME THERE WERE DISCUSSED THE DUTY HOURS AND OVERTIME FOR THE PROJECT. YOU SAY YOU WERE ADVISED TO ADJUST YOUR SCHEDULE TO CONFORM WITH WORK REQUIREMENTS AFTER REVIEWING THE SITUATION AT A COUPLE OF AIR BASES. YOU WERE THEN TO NOTIFY MANAGEMENT AT HILL AIR FORCE BASE, BY MESSAGE, OF THE WORKLOAD AND OVERTIME REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE. HOWEVER, BECAUSE OF CERTAIN DIFFICULTIES YOU SAY YOU WERE UNABLE TO GET A MESSAGE THROUGH TO THE PROPER AUTHORITIES TO NOTIFY THEM OF THE REQUIRED OVERTIME NEEDED TO EXPEDITIOUSLY COMPLETE THE PROJECT.

THE INFORMATION FURNISHED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE SHOWS THAT TWO 4- MAN TECHNICAL INSPECTION TEAMS WERE FORMED TO VISIT SOUTHEAST ASIA BASES DURING FEBRUARY 1971. YOU AND MR. CHARLES R. BLAKE WERE APPOINTED LEADERS. ALL MEMBERS OF THE TEAMS WERE TWICE BRIEFED ON THE OBJECTIVES, THE PROBLEMS THAT WOULD BE ENCOUNTERED, AND THAT OVERTIME FUNDS WERE NOT AVAILABLE - SPECIFICALLY, THAT NO OVERTIME COULD BE WORKED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL IN ACCORDANCE WITH GOVERNING REGULATIONS. YOU AND MR. BLAKE WERE TO LEAVE PRIOR TO THE DEPARTURE OF THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE TEAMS AND ONE OF THE THINGS TO BE DONE WAS "TO ASSESS THE WORKLOAD SITUATION AND PROVIDE MMN WITH A MESSAGE INDICATING THE NECESSITY AND REQUIREMENT FOR OVERTIME IF THEIR (YOUR) ASSESSMENT INDICATED THIS NEED. MMN, AND IN TURN MM, WOULD ASSESS THEIR REQUIREMENTS AGAINST ALL OTHER PRESSING NEEDS WITHIN THE DIVISION AND DIRECTORATE AND DECIDE WHETHER THE OVERTIME COULD BE ALLOWED." THE FIRST INDICATION RECEIVED THAT OVERTIME HAD BEEN WORKED WAS A PERSONAL LETTER FROM MR. BLAKE TO HIS SUPERVISOR ON FEBRUARY 12, 1971. ON FEBRUARY 18, 1971, A MESSAGE WAS RECEIVED FROM MR. BLAKE ADVISING THAT OVERTIME HAD BEEN WORKED. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE REFUSED TO PROCESS THESE OVERTIME REQUESTS AFTER THE FACT.

AFM 40-1, SECTION 5232, PARAGRAPH 2, PERTAINING TO OVERTIME PAY PROVIDES IN PART AS FOLLOWS:

"AUTHORIZATION REQUIREMENT. OVERTIME WORK MUST BE ORDERED BY THE APPROPRIATE SUPERVISOR AND APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE OFFICIAL DESIGNATED TO AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF OVERTIME. SINCE OVERTIME APPROVAL CONSTITUTES AUTHORITY FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS AND CERTIFICATION THAT FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE, APPROVAL WILL BE OBTAINED BEFORE THE WORK IS PERFORMED *** "

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, AND SINCE IT APPEARS FROM THE INFORMATION FURNISHED THAT YOU WERE FULLY ADVISED PRIOR TO ENTERING ON TEMPORARY DUTY OF THE REQUIREMENT OF THE REGULATION THAT OVERTIME COULD NOT BE WORKED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN NOTICE, THERE IS NO AUTHORITY TO ALLOW YOUR CLAIM.

IN SUPPORT OF YOUR CLAIM YOU FURNISHED A COPY OF ANNEX C 00AMA PP 70 7, DATED NOVEMBER 20, 1970, WHICH IS A SCHEDULE OF ESSENTIAL PROGRAM ACTIONS TO BE CONDUCTED BY THE AIR CORPS. THE ONLY REFERENCE IN THIS PROGRAM TO OVERTIME PAY IS CONTAINED UNDER ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE, PARAGRAPH B, WHICH GIVES INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO REPORT REGULAR AND OVERTIME PAY AT THE END OF EACH PAY PERIOD. THIS MAY NOT BE VIEWED AS AUTHORITY FOR THE AUTHORIZATION OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION.

THE SETTLEMENT OF SEPTEMBER 29, 1971, THEREFORE, IS SUSTAINED.