ISAIAH JOHNSON

August 3, 1949.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and ordered to be printed

Mr. DENTON, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the

following

REPORT

[To accompany S. 622]

The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (S. 622) for the relief of Isaiah Johnson, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

The facts will be found fully set forth in Senate Report No. 451, Eightieth Congress, which is appended hereto and made a part of this report. Your committee concur in the recommendation of the Senate.

[8. Rept. No. 451, 81st Cong., 1st sess.]

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to pay to Isaiah Johnson, of the District of Columbia, (1) a sum equal to the amount of compensation which would have been payable to him for service rendered as an employee of the United States during the period July 1 to July 18, 1945, had such service been rendered as a de jure rather than a de facto employee, and (2) a sum equal to the lump-sum payment for annual leave (a) which had been accumulated by him at the time of the termination of his period of service as a de jure employee of the United States on April 30, 1944, and (b) which would have been credited to him had his period of service as an employee of the United States during the period May 1, 1944, to July 18, 1945, been de jure employment.

The second section of the proposed legislation provides that the Civil Service Commission be authorized and directed to recompute the annuity of the claimant under the Civil Service Retirement Act as of the date of his retirement, and, for the purposes of such recomputation, service performed by him as a de facto employee of the United States from May 1, 1944, to July 18, 1945, shall be considered as creditable service in the employment of the United States.

Such payments shall be in full satisfaction of the claims of Isaiah Johnson for compensation for such service rendered by him and for annual leave accumulated by him, both of which were unpaid because of the failure of the employing agency of the Government to give him notice of his automatic separation from the service of the United States upon reaching the age of 70 under the provisions of the Civil Service Retirement Act then in force.

STATEMENT

The claimant entered the employment of the Federal Works Agency on August 28, 1943, as a guard and special policeman, at a rate of compensation of $1,500 per annum. On July 18, 1945, it was discovered that he was more than 70 years of age and that he became a de facto employee as of May 1, 1944. He was separated from the rolls as of July 18, 1945, and reappointed on July 19, 1945, under section 2 (b) of the Civil Service Retirement Act.

On September 30, 1945, the claimant was finally separated by a reduction in force.

The claimant worked full time from July 1 to July 28, 1945. For this service he was compensated in the sum of $63.72. Had he been paid in the usual way he would have received $193.65. His loss of annual leave was 785 hours or 98% days. Had the claimant been paid for his leave in a lump sum as of the date of separation on July 18, 1945, the amount received would have been payment for 101% days or $714.04.

The failure to notify the claimant of his reaching retirement age was an oversight on the part of the Government agency involved.

It is the opinion of the committee that this is a meritorious claim.

Attention is invited to the following letter, dated May 10, 1949, to the Honorable Pat McCarran, chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, from Peyton Ford, the assistant to the Attorney General, in regard to this proposed legislation.

Hon. PAT MCCARRAN,

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D. C., May 10, 1949.

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate,

Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR SENATOR: This is in response to your request for the views of the Department of Justice relative to the bill (S. 622) for the relief of Isaiah Johnson. The bill would provide for payment to Isaiah Johnson of the District of Columbia, (1) a sum equal to the amount of compensation which would have been payable to him for services rendered as an employee of the United States during the period July 1, to July 18, 1945, had such services been rendered as a de jure rather than a de facto employee and (2) a sum equal to the lump-sum payment for annual leave which he had accumulated at the time his service was terminated on April 30, 1944, and that which would have been credited to him for the period May 1, 1944, to July 18, 1945, had the latter service been de jure employment.

The bill would provide that such sums, together with those authorized by sections shall be in full satisfaction of his claims for compensation for such service and such accumulated leave both of which were unpaid because of the alleged failure of the employing agency to notify him of his automatic separation from the service upon reaching the age of seventy. Section 2 of the bill would direct the Civil Service Commission to recompute claimant's annuity under the Civil Service Retirement Act of May 29, 1930, as amended, as of the date of his retirement and would provide that for the purposes of such recomputation the service performed as a de facto employee shall be considered as creditable service in the employment of the United States.

In response to your request, a report was obtained from the Federal Works Agency concerning this legislation. That report, which is enclosed, was prepared in connection with S. 2859, an identical bill, introduced in the Eightieth Congress, and is to be considered as that Agency's report on the present bill. It states that claimant entered the employment of the Federal Works Agency on August 28, 1943, as a guard and special policeman, CPC-4, $1,500 per annum. On July 18, 1945, it was discovered that he was more than 70 years of age and that he became a de facto employee as of May 1, 1944. He was separated from the rolls as of July 18, 1945, and reappointed on July 19, 1945, under section 2 (b) of the Civil Service Retirement Act. On September 30, 1945, he was finally separated by a reduction in force. Claimant's loss of annual leave was 785 hours or 98% days, having carried over 685 hours from 1944, and being credited with 112 hours through July 18, 1945, from which total he used 12 hours' leave. Had he received a lump-sum payment for his leave as of the date of separation on July 18, 1945, he would have received payment for the preiod July 19, 1945, through 1 hour on December 7, 1945, three holidays being included therein, making a total of 101% days or $714.04.

The Federal Works Agency states that since the failure to notify claimant of his reaching retirement age was an oversight, that Agency would interpose no objection to the enactment of the bill.

Whether the bill should be enacted presents a question of legislative policy concerning which the Department of Justice prefers to make no recommendation. The Director of the Bureau of the Budget has advised this Department that there would be no objection to the submission of this report.

Yours sincerely,

MRS. MARY CAPODANNO AND THE LEGAL GUARDIAN OF VINCENT CAPODANNO

AUGUST 3, 1949.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and ordered to be printed

Mr. LANE, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the

following

REPORT

[To accompany H. R. 1484)

The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 1484) for the relief of Mrs. Mary Capodanno, and the legal guardian of Vincent Capodanno, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill do pass.

The amendments are as follows:

Page 1, line 6, strike out "$2,500", and insert in lieu thereof "$884.84".

Page 1, line 8, strike out "$1,500", and insert in lieu thereof "$354.93".

Page 1, line 9, after the word "States", insert "and against Francis M. Regan, an employee of the United States,".

The purpose of the proposed legislation is to pay the sum of $884.84 to Mrs. Mary Capodanno and the sum of $354.93 to the legal guardian of Vincent Čapodanno, both of Somerville, Mass., in full settlement of all claims against the United States for personal injuries sustained by them, resulting from an accident which occurred on April 8, 1944, when the car in which the said Mrs. Mary Capodanno and the said Vincent Capodanno were riding was struck by a United States Navy truck at the interesetion of Webster Avenue and Prospect Street, Somerville, Mass.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

It appears that on April 8, 1944, a civilian employed by the Navy as a chauffeur at the Navy Yard, Boston, Mass., was driving an Autocar truck, with a 20-foot trailer attached, in a southwesterly direction along Porspect Street in Somerville, Mass. It was raining, and the