B-149600, AUG. 12, 1966
Highlights
THE FACTS IN YOUR CASE WERE FULLY SET FORTH IN OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 14. IN THE THIRD PARAGRAPH WHEREIN WE SAY THAT "MANNING SCALE NO. 7 WAS NOT IMPLEMENTED. THAT MANNING SCALE NO. 5 REMAINED IN EFFECT UNTIL ISSUANCE OF NO. 8" AND SAY THAT IF THIS IS TRUE THEN OVERSIGHT OR CLERICAL ERROR WAS RESPONSIBLE. THE APPROVAL OF A MANNING SCALE BY THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF TRANSPORTATION DID NOT AUTOMATICALLY RAISE THE PAY OF ALL POSITIONS THEREIN SO AS TO ENTITLE THE EMPLOYEES TO A RAISE AS OF THE DATE THE MANNING SCALE WAS APPROVED. A FURTHER STEP WAS NECESSARY. THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY HAS REPORTED THAT THE MANNING SCALE NO. 7 WAS NOT IMPLEMENTED DUE TO CONTINUED EFFORTS TO RECONCILE MANNING SCALES WITH THE NEW MARINE WAGE SCALES AND DESIGNATIONS.
B-149600, AUG. 12, 1966
TO MR. LARS H. ROLFSEN:
THIS REFERS TO LETTER OF JULY 27, 1966, WRITTEN IN YOUR BEHALF BY MR. O- REILLY, CONCERNING YOUR CLAIM FOR AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT ALLEGED TO BE DUE YOU AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY DURING THE PERIOD NOVEMBER 18, 1952, TO FEBRUARY 1, 1954.
THE FACTS IN YOUR CASE WERE FULLY SET FORTH IN OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 14, 1962, B-149600, TO YOU AND NEED NOT BE REPEATED HERE. YOU REFER TO THE STATEMENT IN OUR DECISION OF AUGUST 14, 1962, IN THE THIRD PARAGRAPH WHEREIN WE SAY THAT "MANNING SCALE NO. 7 WAS NOT IMPLEMENTED; THAT MANNING SCALE NO. 5 REMAINED IN EFFECT UNTIL ISSUANCE OF NO. 8" AND SAY THAT IF THIS IS TRUE THEN OVERSIGHT OR CLERICAL ERROR WAS RESPONSIBLE.
THE APPROVAL OF A MANNING SCALE BY THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF TRANSPORTATION DID NOT AUTOMATICALLY RAISE THE PAY OF ALL POSITIONS THEREIN SO AS TO ENTITLE THE EMPLOYEES TO A RAISE AS OF THE DATE THE MANNING SCALE WAS APPROVED. A FURTHER STEP WAS NECESSARY, NAMELY, THE ISSUANCE OF A STANDARD FORM 50 (NOTIFICATION OF PERSONNEL ACTION) WHICH HAD TO BE MADE OUT FOR EACH AFFECTED INDIVIDUAL. THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY HAS REPORTED THAT THE MANNING SCALE NO. 7 WAS NOT IMPLEMENTED DUE TO CONTINUED EFFORTS TO RECONCILE MANNING SCALES WITH THE NEW MARINE WAGE SCALES AND DESIGNATIONS. MOREOVER, THERE IS NO RECORD OF A FORM 50 BEING ISSUED IN YOUR CASE.
CONCERNING THE STATEMENT IN LETTER OF JULY 27, 1966, THAT YOU HAVE SUBMITTED CLAIMS TO OUR OFFICE FOR THE PERIOD PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 18, 1952, AND SUBSEQUENT TO FEBRUARY 1, 1954, THERE IS NOTHING OF RECORD IN OUR OFFICE TO SHOW THAT SUCH CLAIMS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED HERE. HOWEVER, THERE IS ON FILE AN UNDATED LETTER FROM YOU, RECEIVED HERE JUNE 3, 1958, STATING THAT YOU INTENDED TO FILE ADDITIONAL CLAIMS BUT THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE ALL THE NECESSARY RECORDS AND CORRESPONDENCE PERTAINING TO THE CLAIMS AND WHEN YOU DO GET THE NECESSARY INFORMATION YOU WILL SUBMIT THE CLAIMS.
ON THE BASIS OF THE FOREGOING WE HAVE NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO SUSTAIN THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM.