Evening star., 1901-07-13
PER DIEM CLERKS
Commissioner Way Of Meeting Eff
feet of Controllers Decision.
INSPECTORS INSTEAD OF CLERKS
The Original Controversy and How
II Started and Grew.
MISS BEES SUNDAY WORK

AA4 4A'S ~ DA4 w VIM
Despite assurances to the contrary, there
is a general impression at the District
building to the effect that the recent ruling
Of the controller Of the treasury throwing
out of employment four per diem employees
in the street cleaning department will have
wider range of influence than was ex-
pected, and that 1t may call forth many
interesting complications. AS a matter Of
fact one complication and embarrassment
is now on the hands of the Commissioners,
while others appear to be approaching.
The controller ruled that the Commission
ers were without authority to employ two
clerks in the office Of the street cleaning
department and two additional foremen. all
being paid out of the appropriation for
street cleaning as per diem employees.
The appropriation made specific provision
for the office force of the superintendent.
naming the employees and their salaries. 1t
also specified the number of foremen that
might be employed and the inspectors The
controller further decided that under
other appropriation, that for the collection
and disposal of city refuse. clause in
the act gave the Commissioners power to
arrange for necessary inspection. The col
lection and disposal of city refuse Is super
vised by Warner Stutler, who is also the
superintendent of street cleaning.
Taking advantage of that portion of the
controllers ruling which said that proper
inspection of the collection and disposal of
city refuse might be provided for, the
Commissioners have appointed two ad-
ditional inspectors One Of these. A. ].
Lee, f3 a clerk and inspector formerly en-
ployed under the per diem appropriation of
the street cleaning department. and who
was ostensibly dropped from the rolls as
result of the decision by the controller. 1t
is stated that he will probably continue to
perform his former duties Heretofore he
has been employed for four or five days
each week. in the office. while for one or
two days each week he has actually per-
formed inspection work on the streets. The
Commissioners are understood to take the
position that there is little difference be-
tween clerical and inspection work. The
inspection OF reports from inspectors, it is
understood. is regarded as coming within
the purvtew of the law in the designation
of inspector
The second inspector appointed by the
Commissioners yesterday, as stated in The
Star, is Mr.. Twohey. who was not for
merly in the street cleaning or city refuse
departments. To what duty he will be
signed is not known. He Is regarded as the
successor of Miss Clara Bee. a clerk. fer
merly employed in the street cleaning
office. 1t was generally understood that
Miss Bee was soon to tender her resigna
tion for purely private reasons. In fact, 1t
is said she Is soon to be married.
Pay for Sunday Work.
The whole matter of the employment OF
per diem clerks in the street cleaning office
and of the two foremen in addition to those
specifically provided by law was brought
up by the accounting officers Of the Dis
trict questioning the pay Of Miss Bee for
Sunday work
Miss Bee appeared on the rolls up to the
middle of May entitled to compensation
for Sundays at the same per diem rate as
on week days. Her presence at the Office
was necessary, it was stated, to receive re-
ports Of dead animals and other matters
from the police, and to make out list of
work for the various inspectors that they
might begin labor early Monday morning.
Another Sunday emplOye of the department
is the weigher of garbage which is collect
ed from hotels and restaurants each Sun
day. Auditor Petty held that no per diem
emplOye was entitled to a full days pay
unless a full days labor had been per-
formed. He stated that the register at the
District building showed that Miss Bee had
not spent all of Sundays at the building
some days being there short period as
ten minutes. and reckoning on the basis OF
the usual secular day hours of labor he
reported that she had been overpaid about
$144
Mr.. Stutier replied that Miss Bee had
each Sunday accomplished all the work
that was to be done that day; that her
service had been continuous and he regard
ed her as legally entitled to full pay. The
work was necessary he said, and had to
be done. He said. furthermore. that Miss
Bee had often worked overtime and on hol-
idays without additional compensation, and
he thought this should Offset any claim
that she had been paid too much for the
Sunday work. Mr.. StutIer said that nu-
merous employees in the District service
were paid per diem rates when they did not
work. he said that under former admin
tstrations the superintendent and assistant
superintendents and inspectors in the street
cleaning department were paid on the per
diem rolls for 365 days in the year, when
1t was we'll known there was no street
cleaning on Sunday. He declared that
these rolls had been passed without ques-
tion by the auditor:
The Auditors Reply.
Auditor Petty replied that he had never,
with the full knowledge of the facts. passed
roll where the service of each employe
thereon had not covered the entire period
for which claim for pay was made.
He said he never questioned the rolls cer-
titled by his fellow officials as being correct
and just unless some specific charge was
made or item questioned
Inc controversy resulted in the matter
OF per diem employment being laid before
@ .ne controller OF the treasury, with the re-
suit that he stated what has already an
peared In The Star. He held that the hours
ana compensation Of per diem emplovas
was matter Of administration In the
hands Of the Commissioners But he went
further, and decided that the Commission.
ers had no authority to employ the two
clerks and two foremen
The controllers decision was not asked
on tnat point He gave it. however and
the Commissioners are now wrestIjnp WITH
the matter. Although the controller did
not say so the Revised Statutes state that
all Jerks and employees must work seven
houSs per day at least
In regard to the action of the Commits
sioners in dismfssing the two foremen not
authorized by the appropriation, there ia
much interest. There was but one fore
man to be dismissed, the second official
having died some days ago. So one fore
man was actually dropped
In this connection arises the biggest COM.
plication now on the Commissioners hands.
Before the decision of the controller was
received the Commissioners had urood ~