Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1902-07-29


coed thirty. The subject Of the absence
for the fiscal year Wis a matter between
the public printer and himself. matter
exclusively within the official discretion Of
the public printer, and consequently beyond
the jurisdiction Of courts and accounting
officers. Whether these leaves Of absence
ran from Monday morning to Saturday
night, whether they were for an entire
Germ the courts and accounting officers than
whether they were-granted in warm
weather or In cold
The public printer must determine the
times and seasons and periods of absences
as the needs or exigencies of his depart
ment may permit. But at this point his
discretion stops and the supervision OF the
accounting officers hegins!s He has turis-
diction of attendance and work, to grant
leaves of absence or to refuse them but
not to increase wages or vary or augment
the legal liabilities Of the government
Whether he grant leaves of absence by the
month or the week. or for single day, or
for a designated number of days, or not at
all will not affect the wages of the en-
ployes; wages are not within the SCOPE of
his discretion and will continue precisely
the same as If no leave Of absence had
been granted or refused. This subject Of
the leave-of- bsence laws is not wages bur
work: they authorize the public printer to
lessen work; they do not authorize him to
augment pay
at should be noted that an increased rate
Of paw and consequently an increased rate
of Communication has since been authorized
but this fact does not affect the reasoning
of the court.
No PAY for Sundays.
ct have quoted at length from the opin-
ion of the court, which seems so clear and
convincing that the executive or account
ing officers should hesitate before going
contrary to the construction therein main
tanned The changes made In the leaves Of
absence laws In the government printing
Office since the opinion was rendered do not
affect the principle therein decided, that it
was not the purpose of the statute grant
ing leaves with pay to thereby either lower
or raise the wages of those affected there
by, and that where an employee in the gov
eminent printing office is granted a certain
leave of absence he is entitled to the same
pay during such period of absence as if he
had not been on leave This construction
is recognized in the language of the latest
act, authorizing, as 1t does, pay during
leave at the same rate of pay received
during the time In which said leave
was earned The rate Of pay received by
any per diem employe or piece worker in
the government printing office for a period
of time during which one or more Sundays
intervene, does not include pay for those
Sundays
Following, therefore, the decision Of the
Court of Claims in the Harrison case, SUI
pra, must hold that the act under consid-
alton does not affect wages, but work
and does not give to you any right to paw
to employees of the government printing
office for Sundays intervening in any pc
RODS of leaves of absence granted to them
Pay Allowed for Holidays.
'sIt will be noted that have said moth
ing about payment for holidays occurring
during leaves of absence, although your
question included them. This omission was
Intentional because I am Of the opinion
that payment for holidays occurring during
leave of absence stands upon a different
basis from payment for Sundays. This
question was not before the court in the
Harrison case, but in the light Of the rea-
soning in that case it Is not difficult to in
fer what their decision would have been
had one or more holidays interviewed during
the period of leave granted the claimant in
that case.
cat the date Of that decision there were
various laws upon the statute books which,
with subsequent laws, were practically re-
enacted as section 46 of the act of January
u. 1895. supra, which Is as follows: The
employees of the government printing office
shall be allowed the following legal holt
days with pay, to wit: The first day of
January, the 22d day Of February, the 4th
day Of July. the 25th day Of December, In
auguration day, Memorial day. labor's holt
day and such day as may be designated by
the President of the United States as day
Following the reasoning of the Court of
Claims III the Harrison case, it seems clear
that the holidays named are practically
made working days, so far as pay Is con-
cerned. and that 1t can make no difference
in computing the pay due to an employee
whether the holidays fall in during a period
of service during a period of leave, and
that he is entitled to pay for any Of the
holidays named. If included in the leave
period. not by virtue of the leave of alb
sence law. but because it is day for which
he would have been paid if not on leave.
This Is in harmony with the ruling of the
Court Of Claims. which gives to an en-
ploye of the government printing office the
same pay during a period of leave as he
would have been entitled to had no leave
been taken. and would except the legal
HOLIDAYS named from the force Of the re-
matnder of this decision"
The question was submitted to Controller
Tracewell few weeks ago by committee
from the Bookbinders Union of the gov
eminent printing office, which later laid the
question before Public Printer Palmer. The
latter requested a decision from the con-