(A-58617)

TRANSPORTATION-HOUSEHOLD GOODS-EXCESS

An officer of the Army is entitled to have his authorized change of station allowance of household goods shipped from places other than his old station to his new station, by motor van and freight at a cost not exceeding that of a like weight by ordinary freight from the old to the new station, under rules stated in 10 Comp. Gen. 58, and 14 Comp. Gen. 65.

A constructive credit for packing and crating under paragraph 18 Army Regulations 30-960, June 12, 1931, may be made in connection with motor-van shipment only for the purpose of ascertaining the most economical method for transportation.

An officer promoted during August 1933 is not entitled to the increased change of station weight allowance prescribed for the higher rank because of the provisions of section 201 of the Economy Act.

Comptroller General McCarl to Maj. E. C. Morton, United States Army, November 24, 1934:

There has been received your letter of October 29, 1934, requesting decision as follows:

Decision is requested as to what amount, if any, should be collected from Colonel Noble J. Wiley, Inf., in connection with payment to the carriers for the services performed, under the provisions of paragraph 24, Army Regulations 30-960.

Three shipments of the personal effects of the officers are involved, as follows:

B/L WQ 541720, Dec. 28, 1933, from Montgomery, Ala., to Bay Ridge, N. Y., consisting of 1,122 lbs. of other baggage. Transportation charges in connection with this B/L were paid in voucher #8422, April 1934, money accounts of W. O. Rawls, Maj., F. D.

B/L WQ 702788, Nov. 29, 1933, from New Cumberland, Pa., to Bay Ridge N. Y., consisting of 3,525 lbs. professional books and 200 lbs. other baggage, transportation charges having been paid in voucher #17672, Feb. 1934 money accounts of W. O. Rawls, Maj., F. D.

Motor van shipment, from Ft. McPherson, Ga., to New York, consisting of 200 lbs. of professional books and 6,600 lbs. of other baggage, transportation charges thereon having been paid in voucher #3040, Oct. 1933 money accounts of E. F. Ely, Maj., F. D.

Decision is requested in view of the fact that a doubt exists as to whether credit should be allowed the officer for packing and crating upon only the weight of the goods actually shipped by van or upon the entire weight shipped, in order to determine what it would have cost the Government to transport the authorized weight allowance in one lot in the most economical manner from the officer's last permanent station, Jacksonville, Fla., to his new station.

Colonel Wiley was, by paragraph 3, Special Orders No. 221, War Department, dated September 22, 1933, relieved from his temporary assignment to duty in connection with the Civilian Conservation. Corps at Fort McPherson, Ga., effective on or about October 1, 1933, and further relieved from his permanent duty assignment as instructor, infantry, Florida National Guard, and directed to proceed to Fort Hamilton, New York, and report to the commanding officer for duty. The personal effects of the officer were turned over to the Quartermaster Department for shipment from three different places to his new station. The first shipment, consisting of 6,600 pounds of household goods and 200 pounds of professional books, were transported on or about October 9, 1933, by motor van from Fort Mc

Pherson, Atlanta, Ga., to Fort Hamilton, New York, at a cost of $180. The second shipment, consisting of 2,100 pounds of household goods and 3,525 pounds of professional books, moved on Government bill of lading No. WQ-702788, dated November 29, 1933, from New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, to Bay Ridge (Fort Hamilton) New York, at the rate of 72 cents per hundredweight, or at a cost of $40.50. The third shipment, consisting of 1,122 pounds of household goods, was shipped from Maxwell Field, Montgomery, Ala., on Government bill of lading No. WQ-541720, dated December 28, 1933, at $1.98 per hundredweight, a cost of $22.22.

The first lot was shipped by motor van, and under the provisions of paragraph 18, Army Regulations 30–960, June 12, 1931, the only element involving a credit for packing and crating, is for the purpose of ascertaining the most economical method of transportation. Furthermore, this shipment having been made from Fort McPherson, under the provisions of paragraph 10 (6), Army Regulations 30– 960, June 12, 1931, transportation at Government expense may not exceed the cost of shipment on a like weight by ordinary freight. The L. C. L. rate to Fort Hamilton is $1.83 per hundredweight, and the carload rate between the same points is $1.28 per hundredweight. The cost of this shipment by motor van from Fort McPherson does not exceed the cost of a like weight by ordinary freight from Jacksonville, to the new station, and there is no excess for collection on this shipment.

The second lot was shipped from New Cumberland to the new station. For the purpose of determining whether this shipment was within the authorized allowance or whether there is any excess cost of its shipment, under the rules stated in 10 Comp. Gen. 58, and 14 Comp. Gen. 65, the constructive gross weight of the 6,600 pounds shipped by motor van is determined by increasing such weight by 25 percent as provided in paragraph 18 (d), Army Regulations 30-960, making such gross weight 8,250 pounds. The officer was promoted to colonel, August 22, 1933, date of acceptance not shown, but because of the provisions of section 201 of the Economy Act, 47 Stat. 403, he continued to be entitled to the pay and allowances of a lieutenant colonel, and his authorized change of station baggage allowance was not increased from 9,500 pounds to 11,000 pounds by reason of such promotion, and his authorized weight allowance on the effective date of the permanent change of station was 9,500 pounds. Of this shipment 1,250 pounds (9,500-8,250) of household goods and his professional books, were authorized to be shipped at Government expense, and the cost of transportation for the 850 pounds in excess thereof is required to be borne by the officer, being at 72 cents per hundredweight, $6.12.

The third shipment of 1,122 pounds of household goods was in excess of the authorized change of station allowance and the cost thereof, $22.22, is required to be borne entirely by the officer.

There is for collection from the officer $28.34 for excess cost of transportation of his personal effects on permanent change of station from Jacksonville, Fla., to Fort Hamilton, New York.

(A-56659)

COMPENSATION-40-HOUR WEEK-MINIMUM WAGE

Section 23 of the act of March 28, 1934, 48 Stat. 522, establishing the 40-hour week, fixes the wage schedules in effect June 1, 1932, for those classes of positions within the act then in existence, as the minimum under which a wage board may not go in adjusting wages on a 40-hour week basis.

A wage board would not be limited by section 23 of the act of March 28, 1934, 48 Stat. 522, in fixing the wage rates or schedule of rates for an entirely new class of position subject to the 40-hour week, created since June 1, 1932, for which there existed on that date no wage rate or schedule of wage rates, although the salary rate or schedule of rates for the new position should bear the proper relationship to other classes of positions paid on a 40-hour week basis.

Comptroller General McCarl to the Secretary of War, November 26, 1934: There has been received your letter of October 29, 1934, as follows: 1. With reference to your letter of September 10, 1934 (A-56659), pertaining to the application of section 23, act of March 28, 1934, to certain employees of the Chemical Warfare Service at Edgewood Arsenal, your attention is invited to the fact that the last wage survey at that arsenal, upon which the wage schedule in effect June 1, 1932-and still in effect-was based, was made in August 1929. In connection with proposed new wage survey by the wage board at Edgewood Arsenal the following questions have arisen upon which your decision is respectfully requested:

a. Does section 23, act of March 28, 1934, preclude the readjustment of wage schedules downward by wage boards, when and if conditions are found to have changed since June 1, 1932, or since the survey was made upon which the schedules in effect on June 1, 1932, were based, so as to warrant such revision? b. Will the same construction of the law apply to a new employee hired to fill a vacancy in an existing position, the wage rate of which was set by a wage board?

c. What application, if any, would this section of the law have in the case of a position created since its enactment, whether such new position be filled by promotion from a lower position or by a new appointment?

Section 23 of the act of March 28, 1934, 48 Stat. 522, provides as follows:

The weekly compensation, minus any general percentage reduction which may be prescribed by act of Congress, for the several trades and occupations, which is set by wage boards or other wage-fixing authorities, shall be reestablished and maintained at rates not lower than necessary to restore the full weekly earnings of such employees in accordance with the full-time weekly earnings under the respective wage schedules in effect on June 1, 1932: Provided, That the regular hours of labor shall not be more than forty per week; and all overtime shall be compensated for at the rate of not less than time and one-half.

This section not only provides that wage schedules for the 40-hour week shall be reestablished at rates not lower than necessary to restore full-time weekly earnings under schedules in effect on June 1,

7556-35 -28

1932, but also that such minimum schedules shall be "maintained ", clearly prohibiting a wage board from adopting new schedules of wages for the 40-hour week at rates less than for full-time weekly earnings under schedules in effect June 1, 1932. In other words, the statute fixes the wage schedules in effect June 1, 1932, for classes of positions then in existence, as the minimum under which a wage board may not go in adjusting wages on a 40-hour week basis. The statute does not prohibit a wage board from adjusting downward to the minimum prescribed by the statute any present wage schedule which is now higher than said minimum. Question (a) is answered accordingly.

In decision of September 12, 1934, A-56997, 14 Comp. Gen. 215, it was held:

The problem involved in question (c) is understood to be whether the statute saves to employees on a 40-hour week basis the scheduled rates as of June 1, 1932, for a trade or occupation, or the rates that may have been paid to an individual. In this connection the statute has reference to the schedule of rates paid as of June 1, 1932, for the trade or occupation properly within the law, and not to the rate in such schedule received on June 1, 1932, by a particular individual.

In other words, the statute relates to positions and not to individual employees. Question (b) is answered in the affirmative.

The adjustment of wages required by the statute relates only to positions as to which schedules of wages were in effect on June 1, 1932. Referring to question (c) a wage board would not be limited by said statute in fixing the wage rate or schedule of rates for an entirely new class of position, subject to the 40-hour week, created since June 1, 1932, for which there existed on that date no wage rate or schedule of wage rates, although the salary rate or schedule of rates for the new position should bear the proper relationship to other classes of positions paid on a 40-hour week basis. Decision of November 10, 1934, A-58525, 14 Comp. Gen. 376.

(A-57310)

CLASSIFICATION-FIELD SERVICE-EMERGENCY POSITIONS

The phrase so far as may be practicable" appearing in section 3 of the Welch Act of May 28, 1928, 45 Stat. 785, and section 2 of the Brookhart Salary Act of July 3, 1930, 46 Stat. 1005, extending the principles of classification to the field service, only vests in an administrative office a discretion as to the particular grade or salary range prescribed by the Classification Act in which a field position is to be placed or allocated, and does not in any case authorize an administrative office to fix the salary rate of a field position without regard to the Classification Act. The provisions of Executive Order No. 6746, dated June 21, 1934, require the classification of positions of employees under executive departments and independent establishments whose salaries are paid from emergency funds, either under the terms of the Classification Act, as amended, or in accordance with the terms of the Executive order.

In any case where a field employee heretofore has been paid less than the minimum salary rate of the grade in which his position would properly be allocated due to administrative misunderstanding in the matter, an increase in compensation to the minimum salary rate of the grade may now be made during the current fiscal year only on the basis of an administrative promotion, unless the amount of the increase is less than one step in the grade.

Comptroller General McCarl to the Governor, Farm Credit Administration, November 27, 1934:

Consideration has been given to your letter of October 18, 1934, as follows:

I have received your statement of October 12, 1934 (A-57310), relative to the classification of positions in the Emergency Crop and Feed Loan Offices (field) of the Farm Credit Administration, in accordance with the classification schedules and salary rates prescribed in the Classification Act of 1923, as amended.

The original Classification Act of 1923 provided compensation schedules for the classfication of civilian positions within the District of Columbia, subject to review and revision by the Personnel Classification Board (now the Civil Service Commission), section 5 of that act provides that the compensation schedules shall apply only to civilian employees in the departments within the District of Columbia, and directed that after a survey of the field services, a report be made to Congress containing schedules of positions, grades, and salaries for such field services, which shall follow the principles and rules of the compensation schedules for the departmental service as far as these were applicable to the field services.

The act of December 6, 1924 (43 Stat. 704), made appropriations to enable the heads of the several departments and independent establishments to adjust the compensation of civilian employees in certain field services to correspond, so far as may be practicable, to the rules established by the Classification Act of 1923 for positions in the departmental service in the District of Columbia. This act did not require the heads of the departments and establishments to fix the compensation in all cases in accordance with the classification grade to which they allocated all field positions, it being recognized by the Congress, as shown by section 5 of the original Classification Act of 1923 and by the phrase, "so far as may be practicable", used in the act of December 6, 1924, that the compensation schedules and salary rates fixed for the departmental service in the District of Columbia, on the basis of employment conditions, cost of living, and other factors, might be inapplicable to other communities where these factors were decidedly different. It would appear, therefore, that Congress recognized and expected, by the terms of the act of December 6, 1924, that heads of departments would in some cases fix salary rates which might be less than the minimum rates of the classification grades to which the field positions were allocated in different sections of the country.

The act of February 23, 1934 (Public, No. 97), authorized the Governor of the Farm Credit Administration, without regard to the provisions of other laws applicable to the employment and compensation of officers and employees of the United States, to employ and fix the compensation and duties of such agents, officers, and employees as might be necessary to carry out the purposes of that act, and provided specifically that the compensation of such officers and employees shall be fixed to correspond, so far as may be practicable, to the rates established by the Classification Act of 1923, as amended.

Attention is called to the fact that the Emergency Crop Loan Act of 1934 imposes upon the Governor of the Farm Credit Administration the same duty that was imposed upon the heads of other Government establishments by the act of December 6, 1924, in fixing the rates of pay at different rates from those fixed by the Classification Act of 1923 if the Governor concluded that it would be impracticable to make appointments carrying compensation at the minimum rates of the various grades. Accordingly, after a survey of the duties and responsibilities of the positions in the Washington regional office, Washington, D. C.. allocations of those positions under the schedules of the Classification Act of