Claim for Overtime Compensation for Regular Duties

A prison employee appealed a portion of a Claims Division settlement which denied his claim for overtime compensation for work performed by him from 1958 until 1973. The disallowance was based on the grounds that he had not presented sufficient evidence to show that the overtime was ordered or approved by an appropriate individual. The portion of the overtime work which had been performed prior to April 9, 1963, was barred by statutory limitation and could not be considered on its merits. The employee's claim for overtime compensation was supported by the employee's records which consisted of calendars and documents describing the volume and nature of the work which he performed. The employee conceded that he never was specifically ordered or directed to work overtime, but the volume of the work assigned and deadlines necessitated overtime work. The Bureau of Prisons denied the claim because the overtime work was not ordered or approved. The warden stated that the overtime work had not been necessary and that other officials had performed similar workloads within the normal work week. In his appeal, the employee introduced additional documentation from a union grievance action to show the necessity for overtime work and that the managers had knowingly provided more work than time allowed to complete the work. Because of the absence of sufficient evidence showing that the overtime work performed by the employee was ordered or approved, overtime compensation could not be paid. Accordingly, the disallowance of the original claim was sustained.