https://www.gao.gov/products/137444

B-230740: Nov 29, 1988

A government employees' union appealed the denial of an intermittent Navy employee's claim for retroactive benefits as a full-time employee, contending that he met the full-time requirements, since: (1) he worked two consecutive 80-hour pay periods; and (2) the Navy scheduled his work in advance. GAO held that the union failed to show: (1) any error of fact or law in the original settlement; or (2...

https://www.gao.gov/products/449458

B-230740: Nov 29, 1988

The settlement is affirmed since no material mistake of law or fact in the original settlement is established. The records presented do not clearly establish that the employee served a regular tour of duty scheduled in advance under which he was routinely scheduled for work at specific times and dates for each of the two workweeks of a given pay period. Jr. - Intermittent versus Part-Time Employme...