$.$ ::t6J,T.'". 1928); Attornev General Ouinions H-1303 Article 6252-28, V.T.C.S.,'does not permit an.&ployee to receive extra compensationfor performingthe duties of his state anployusnt,as demonstratedby the exclusi,ans found in section6 of the statute:
(a) Each full-time state employee is eligible to participateir.the programexcept an employee:
(1) who has authority to implement the recommendation being made;
. . . .
(3) whose job descriptionincludes respon- eibilitpfor cost analysis,efficiencyanalysis, savings iuplemcntation,or other related pro- grams within ibe euployee'sagency;
(4) involveidin, or who has access to, agency resear,chand development programs, if that informationis used as the basis of the recosmendation; or
p. 2098 , HonorableAnn W. Richards- Page 3 (J&459)
(5) whose job description includes developing the type of change in the agency administratior.that is recommended by the recommandstior.. . .
V.T.C.S.art. 6252-28,56. The statuteinsteadadds a new term to an eligibleperson'semploymentrelationshipwith the state, enablingan employeeto receivecompensationfor performingintellectual work that is beyond the scope of his employmentresponsibilities and that has a concrete monetary value to the state. Merely by submitting a recommendation, an to the state all claims based on the recommendation.inclu~dingpatent claims, copyright claims, trademarkclaims,and . V.T.C.S. art. 6252-28, IlO( Thus, the state may receive some consideration from participants in the State Employees Incentive Program whose suggestionsare not implemented.
Attorney General 0p::nionWW-790 (1960) determined that an employee awards program of the State Highway Commission did not violate article III, secizion44 of the Texas Constitution. The AppropriationsAct authorizedthe HighwayDepartmentto give employees serviceaward pins and certificatesas compensationfor longevityof serviceand safety award pins and certificatesfor safe operationof state equipment. Acts 195'):, 56th Leg:, 3d~C.S., ch. 23, at 590; see also Acts 1985, 69th Leg.. ch. 980, art. V, 511, at 7768 (simi~ vision in currentapproFriation8 act). The opiniondeterminedthat article III, section 44 of the constitutiondid not prohibit the awards,statingas follows:
Just becausethe awardsare based on the lengthof the employee'sservice, it does not follow that the awards are 'additionalcompensation'in pay- ment for past serviceafter such servicehas been performed. It !.e within the discretionof the Legislatureto dd?terminethat a state employeeis more valuable to the State today because of his uperience gained by long and faithfulpast per- formance.
Attorney General Opinion WW-790 (1960); see also Attorney General Opinion H-336 (1974). In our opinion, the legislaturemay also compensate employees for valuable suggestionspursuant to article 6252-28,V.T.C.S.,without violatingarticle III, section 44 of the Texas Constitution. We will deal with you::secondand third questionstogether. You ask whether funds have been appropriatedto the State Employees Incmtive Commissionfor the 1986-1987bienniumto make awards. If no funds are appropriated ta make awards under the State Employee IncentiveProgram,you wish to know whether a state agency,which has the authorityto accept donationsor gifts, may make awards on behalf
p. 2099 HonorableAnn W. Richards- Page 4 (JM-459)
of the commissionto state employeesbased on the recommendationof the commission.
providesin part: Article6252-28.V.T.C.!;.,
Sec. 2. . . .
(b) From fund% appropriatedfor this purpose, the State EmployesIncentiveCar mission may grant awards to eligi6le state emnlovees who make recommendationsi%at reduce state expenditures, increasestate revenues,or Improvethe qualityof state services.
. . . .
Sec. 4. (a) The