About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-197887 1 (1980-08-07)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadilx0001 and id is 1 raw text is: THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES WNASHING ON. D. C. 20548 FILE: B-197887 DATE: August 7, 1980 MATTER OF: Ronald E. Sho Relocation expenses DIGEST: Employee may not be paid relocation expenses since employing agency deterlined that transfer was primarily for convenience of employee rather than interest of the Government. Employee requested transfer because he lacked opportunity for advancement at former duty -station and he wanted to change geographical area. The issue in this case is whether Mr. Show's transfer was in the interest of the Government so that he may be entitled to relocation expenses incident to a change of his permanent duty station. For the reasons stated below we hold that Mr. Show is not entitled to relocation expenses. On October 29, 1975, the Defense Supply Agency offered Mr. Show a position at Palmdale, California. Mr. Show had requested a transfer because he lacked opportunity for advancement at his own duty location and he desired to locate to another geographical area. The Agency at that time lacked funds for moving expenses, and Mr. Show agreed that he would not receive Government relocation expenses for his move to Palmdale from Sioux Falls, South Dakota, where he was employed by the Air National Guard. The job offer had to be rescinded until his name was placed on a list of eligibles for selection from a Civil Service Commission register because he was serving under an excepted appoint- ment with the Air National Guard. After he was placed on the list of eligibles the Agency offered him the position again, and he accepted without any expressed intention that he would receive relocation expenses. He was officially employed at Palmdale in June 1976. Mr. Show claimed relocation expenses when he found that other employees who had transferred to Palmdale had been paid the expenses. The administrative reports show that his claim was denied because his transfer was for the convenience of the employee rather than the interest of the Government. The Agency had assisted Mr. Show in having his name placed on the Civil Service Commission register as an accommodation to him rather than because of his unique talents. Also, it was Mr. Show who took the initiative in the transfer because of his desire to move to California. Further, the selecting official, Mr. Schermerhorn, stated that if everything else were equal, Mr. Show Vi 2A076

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most