A-56413, NOVEMBER 19, 1935, 15 COMP. GEN. 423

A-56413, NOVEMBER 19, 1935, 15 COMP. GEN. 423

RURAL LETTER CARRIER - COMPENSATION - SAVING CLAUSE, ACT JUNE 25, 1934 IF THE SERVICE OF A RURAL LETTER CARRIER ON AND BEFORE JULY 1, 1934, WAS ON THE BASIS OF SIX TIMES A WEEK AND WAS REDUCED TO THREE TIMES A WEEK SUBSEQUENT TO JULY 1, 1934, THE SAVING CLAUSE REGARDING REDUCTION IN COMPENSATION IN THE ACT OF JUNE 25, 1934 (48 STAT. 1212), INURES TO THE CARRIER PROPORTIONATELY, THAT IS, ONE-HALF OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SALARY RATES PAYABLE UNDER SAID ACT FOR SERVICE ON A ROUTE OF THE SAME LENGTH BY AN OLD CARRIER (COMPUTED UNDER THE SAVING CLAUSE) AND BY A NEW CARRIER, REPRESENTING ONE-HALF OF THE SAVING ACCRUING TO THE OLD CARRIER (15 COMP. GEN. 302 AMPLIFIED).

COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO THE POSTMASTER GENERAL, NOVEMBER 19, 1935:

THERE WAS RECEIVED YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 8, 1935, AS FOLLOWS:

ATTENTION IS INVITED TO YOUR DECISION OF OCTOBER 16, 1935, A-56413, CONSTRUING THE SAVING CLAUSE CONTAINED IN THE ACT OF JUNE 25, 1934, IN THE ADJUSTMENT OF SALARIES OF RURAL LETTER CARRIERS.

IT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT THAT UNDER YOUR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT A GREATER SALARY WOULD BE PAID TO A CARRIER ON A RURAL ROUTE LESS THAN THIRTY MILES IN LENGTH IF THE FREQUENCY IN SERVICE WERE REDUCED FROM SIX TO THREE TIMES A WEEK SUBSEQUENT TO JULY 1, 1934, THAN IS BEING PAID TO OTHER CARRIERS FOR SERVICE OVER ROUTES OF THE SAME LENGTH WHO HAVE BEEN SERVING SUCH ROUTES THREE TIMES A WEEK ON AND SUBSEQUENT TO JUNE 30, 1934. THIS INEQUALITY WOULD BE BROUGHT ABOUT IN THE FOLLOWING WAY:

IN FIXING THE SALARIES OF RURAL CARRIERS, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1934, UNDER THE ACT OF JUNE 25, 1934, CARRIERS SERVING RURAL ROUTES LESS THAN THIRTY MILES IN LENGTH SIX TIMES A WEEK, AND CARRIERS SERVING ROUTES LESS THAN SIXTY MILES IN LENGTH THREE TIMES A WEEK WERE REDUCED $180.00 PER ANNUM. IN OTHER WORDS, THE ANNUAL SALARY FOR SERVICE SIX TIMES A WEEK OVER A ROUTE 13 MILES IN LENGTH OR FOR SERVICE THREE TIMES A WEEK OVER A ROUTE 26 MILES IN LENGTH WAS REDUCED FROM $1,008.00 TO $828.00.

HOWEVER, IF THE RULE PRESCRIBED IN YOUR DECISION OF OCTOBER 16 WERE FOLLOWED AND THE FREQUENCY OF SERVICE ON A ROUTE 26 MILES IN LENGTH WERE REDUCED FROM SIX TO THREE TIMES A WEEK THE SALARY OF THE CARRIER SERVING SUCH ROUTE ON AND SUBSEQUENT TO JUNE 30, 1934 WOULD BE $90.00 LESS THAN $1,008.00 PER ANNUM OR $918.00 WHEREAS A CARRIER WHO HAD BEEN SERVING THREE TIMES A WEEK A ROUTE OF THE SAME LENGTH, ON AND SUBSEQUENT TO JUNE 30, 1934, WOULD RECEIVE ONLY $828.00 PER ANNUM.

A FURTHER EXPRESSION OF YOUR VIEWS REGARDING THIS MATTER IS REQUESTED.

THE PART OF THE DECISION OF OCTOBER 16, 1935, A-56413 (15 COMP. GEN. 302), IN QUESTION IS AS FOLLOWS:

"IS A RURAL CARRIER WHO ON AND BEFORE JULY 1, 1934, WAS SERVING A ROUTE SIX TIMES A WEEK ENTITLED TO THE BENEFIT OF THE SAVING CLAUSE IF THE FREQUENCY OF SERVICE ON THE ROUTE WAS REDUCED FROM SIX TO THREE TIMES A WEEK SUBSEQUENT TO JULY 1, 1934?

SECTION 8 OF THE ACT OF FEBRUARY 28, 1925, 43 STAT. 1064, PROVIDES IN PART AS FOLLOWS:

"A RURAL CARRIER SERVING ONE TRIWEEKLY ROUTE SHALL BE PAID A SALARY AND EQUIPMENT ALLOWANCE ON THE BASIS OF A ROUTE ONE-HALF THE LENGTH OF THE ROUTE SERVED BY HIM. * * *"

HENCE THE LENGTH OF THE ROUTE OF THE SECOND RURAL CARRIER MENTIONED IN YOUR LETTER MAY BE REGARDED AS REDUCED TO HALF ITS LENGTH AND THE SAVING CLAUSE INURES TO HIM PROPORTIONATELY ON THAT BASIS, THAT IS, HIS ANNUAL SALARY SHOULD NOT BE REDUCED MORE THAN $90 (ONE-HALF OF $180) BY OPERATION OF SUBSECTION (A) OF SECTION 8 OF THE ACT OF FEBRUARY 28, 1925, AS AMENDED BY THE ACT OF JUNE 25, 1934, 46 STAT. 1212, REDUCING THE BASIC SALARY RATES OF RURAL LETTER CARRIERS.

THE DECISION WAS BASED ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT ON JULY 1, 1934, THE RURAL CARRIER IN QUESTION WAS SERVING HIS ROUTE SIX TIMES A WEEK AND HAD ALREADY HAD HIS COMPENSATION REDUCED ON THAT DATE TO THE MAXIMUM OF $180 PER ANNUM AS FIXED UNDER THE SAVING CLAUSE CONTAINED IN SECTION 1 (D) OF THE ACT OF JUNE 25, 1934, 48 STAT. 1213. ON THAT BASIS, WHEN THE FREQUENCY OF HIS SERVICE WAS REDUCED FROM 6 TO 3 TIMES PER WEEK SUBSEQUENT TO JULY 1, 1934, HE WAS NO LONGER ENTITLED TO THE ENTIRE BENEFIT OF THE SAVING CLAUSE BUT ONLY PROPORTIONATELY, THAT IS, ONE-HALF OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SALARY RATES PAYABLE UNDER THE ACT OF JUNE 25, 1934, FOR SERVICE ON A ROUTE OF THE SAME LENGTH BY AN OLD CARRIER (COMPUTED UNDER THE SAVING CLAUSE) AND BY A NEW CARRIER, REPRESENTING ONE- HALF OF THE SAVING ACCRUING TO THE OLD CARRIER.

THE ILLUSTRATION GIVEN IN YOUR LETTER IS NOT CLEAR. IN ONE SENTENCE YOU STATE "THE ANNUAL SALARY FOR SERVICE 6 TIMES A WEEK OVER A ROUTE 13 MILES IN LENGTH * * * WAS REDUCED FROM $1,008 TO $828.' THAT WAS THE CORRECT REDUCTION UNDER THE LAW. THEN IN THE NEXT PARAGRAPH YOU USE THE ILLUSTRATION OF A ROUTE 26 MILES IN LENGTH REDUCED FROM 6 TO 3 TIMES PER WEEK, WITH THE SAME REDUCTION IN SALARY RATES. IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE NORMAL RATE FOR A ROUTE 26 MILES IN LENGTH, SERVED 6 TIMES PER WEEK, WAS NOT $1,008 ON JUNE 30, 1934, BUT $1,860, COMPUTED UNDER SECTION 8 OF THE ACT OF FEBRUARY 28, 1925, 43 STAT. 1063.

A CARRIER SERVING A 26-MILE ROUTE 6 TIMES A WEEK RECEIVED $1,860 PRIOR TO JULY 1, 1934. A NEW MAN SERVING THE SAME ROUTE AFTER JULY 1, 1934, WOULD RECEIVE ONLY $1,560, BUT THE OLD MAN WHO CONTINUED ON THE ROUTE WOULD RECEIVE ($1,860 MINUS $180) $1,680. HENCE, HIS SAVING IS NOT $18 BUT ($1,680 MINUS $1,560) $120. THEREFORE, IF AFTER JULY 1, THE SERVICE IS REDUCED FROM 6 TO 3 TIMES A WEEK, HE SHOULD RECEIVE $840, THAT IS, JUST HALF OF WHAT HE WAS THEN RECEIVING FOR 6 TIMES A WEEK, OR $60 (ONE-HALF OF THE SAVING OF $120) MORE THAN THE $780 WHICH A NEW MAN WOULD RECEIVE FOR THE SAME SERVICE.

A CARRIER SERVING A 13-MILE ROUTE 6 TIMES A WEEK RECEIVED $1,008 PRIOR TO JULY 1, 1934. A NEW MAN SERVING THE SAME ROUTE AFTER JULY 1, 1934, WOULD RECEIVE ONLY $780. BUT IF THE OLD MAN CONTINUED TO SERVE IT, HE WOULD RECEIVE ($1,008 MINUS $180) $828. HENCE, HIS SAVING IS NOT $180 BUT ($828 MINUS $780) $48. THEREFORE, IF HIS SERVICE BE REDUCED AFTER JULY 1 FROM 6 TO 3 TIMES A WEEK, HE WILL RECEIVE $414, THAT IS, JUST HALF OF WHAT HE WAS THEN RECEIVING FOR 6 TIMES A WEEK, OR $24 (ONE-HALF OF THE SAVING OF $48) MORE THAN THE $390 WHICH A NEW MAN WOULD RECEIVE FOR THE SAME SERVICE. IS ONLY IN THE CASE OF A 24 MILE ROUTE SERVED 6 TIMES A WEEK THAT THE AMOUNT OF THE SAVING ON JULY 1, 1934, WAS $180 ($1,620 MINUS $1,440), OR THE SAME AS THE REDUCTION ($1,800 MINUS $1,620).

IT IS BELIEVED THESE ILLUSTRATIONS WILL CLARIFY THE RULE INTENDED TO BE STATED IN THE DECISION OF OCTOBER 16, 1935.