To make a long story short, after many emails and calls to the CG Chief of Staff's Office, finally the CG recognized that employees who were hired into CG civilian position while in a terminal leave status during their military service may receive credit for their military service in the computation of their annual leave accrual rates. However, our friends over at DOD have challenged OPM interpretation of this rule (of course!). Anyhow, the CG released a message on this matter back in November 06 and requested that all those who felt they qualified for restitution, should apply in case DOD's request was denied. Has anyone heard anything about this?

I checked w/ MOAA last month and this was the update I received, "There's been no decision from DoJ on this one yet. When we inquired some time ago we got confirmation that DoD has told its agencies to hold claims, but we're still waiting on the appeal ruling."

Here is a link to an ALCGCIV that provides additional background on the original post. Any updates?

R 181828Z JAN 07
FM COMDT COGARD WASHINGTON DC//CG-121//
TO ALCGCIV
ALCGCIV 011/07
COMDTNOTE 12630
SUBJ: CREDIT FOR MILITARY SERVICE FOR LEAVE ACCRUAL PURPOSES WHILE
ON TERMINAL LEAVE
A. ALCOAST 552/06
1. THIS ALCGCIV PROVIDES UPDATED INFORMATION FOR EMPLOYEES WHO
WERE HIRED INTO COAST GUARD CIVILIAN POSITIONS WHILE IN A TERMINAL
LEAVE STATUS DURING THEIR MILITARY SERVICE (REF. A.).
2. AS NOTED IN REF. A., THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE REQUESTED FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ) AN INTERPRETATION OF TITLE 5 U.S. CODE
6303(A), WHICH LIMITS THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH MILITARY RETIREES
MAY RECEIVE CREDIT FOR THEIR MILITARY SERVICE. THE DOJ HAS NOT YET
ISSUED A FINAL OPINION ON THIS MATTER. THE DELAY IN ISSUANCE OF A DOJ
FINAL OPINION IS AS A RESULT OF AN OUTSTANDING CASE FILED IN U.S.
DISTRICT COURT, EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA (ROMANESKI V. SECRETARY
OF THE ARMY), WHICH RAISES THE SAME ISSUES AS THOSE RAISED IN THE
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENTS PASSEY DECISION.
3. WHILE THE OUTCOME OF THE DOJ FINAL OPINION IS UNKNOWN AT THIS
TIME, EMPLOYEES WHO MAY BE AFFECTED BY THIS ISSUE SHOULD SUBMIT A
COPY OF THEIR DD-214 AND SF-50 INDICATING THEIR CIVILIAN APPOINTMENT
TO MR. RON COLEMAN, OFFICE OF CIVILIAN PERSONNEL (CG-1213), 2100
SECOND STREET, SW, WASHINGTON DC 20593-0001, FOR CONSIDERATION. THE
FORMS MAY ALSO BE FAXED TO 202-475-5922.
4. INTERNET RELEASE AUTHORIZED.
5. RONALD R. KOGUT, CHIEF, OFFICE OF CIVILIAN PERSONNEL, SENDS.

I'm waiting for the 1st anniversary of the message you attached and will go back to CGHQ requesting an update on this. I know for a fact that the CG many times tends to practice "monkey management"...hopes the monkey starves to death and goes away. Unfortunately, many times the monkey grows into a King Kong.

On 16 Oct 07, the DOJ issued a Memorandum Opinion (click HERE for the pdf document) relating to annual leave accrual for civilian employees.

quote:

We conclude that such a member is entitled to credit for his years of active military service only for the duration of his terminal leave. Once the employee retires from the uniformed service, he no longer is entitled to credit for his years of active military service unless he satisfies certain statutory exceptions, see id. §§ 6303(a)(A)-(C), (e), and the employee’s leave-accrual rate must be recalculated upon his retirement to reflect his reduced years of creditable service.

If I understand this correctly, (for example) this means that if you were in terminal leave for a period equivalent of 7 pay periods while workig as a GS-XX, you should have been given 8 hours of annual leave and not 4 for each pay perios. In other words, you are owe 28 hours of annual leave. If this is correct, then the other question would be how long before the CG takes corrective action?

Keko

I'm not to sure about your take on this policy, I read it a little bit different, almost need a lawyer. I heard that we're waiting on OPM to again come out with policy on this subject. It'll be 15 years when that happens!!

Lima, I agree, it's complicated. But I spoke w/ the program manager here in HQ on this and what he told me was that they were waiting for DHS and not OPM on how to settle this claim. By that I take he meant fund it $$$$. But he would not elaborate on the details of what it meant. A few of us retirees here in HQ we sat down to read it together and we all interpreted it the same way. That what we are owed is for the delta of hours while we were in terminal leave. In my case I worked as a GS while on terminal leave for 100 days at 4 hours/pay period and they should have paid me at 8 hours/pay period. So for 100 days, CG owes me 4 more hours/pay period. That's it. I was hopping that they would have bump us all to 8 hours and pay us at that rate as of now and also retroactive. That would have been a nice paycheck (no way they would let us go on regular leave for all those days). But that's why DOD fought it...looking out for their most important assets...how to screw its people.

Keko

Don't know if you have seen the new ALCOAST, but again you need to be a layer to understand it. Just wanted to see what your take on the subject is.

Jay

Lima, yes I saw it and you are correct...not easy to read. It basically says that unless you retired after April 28, 2005 and you were appointed to your civilian job while on terminal leave and you met the many almost impossible requirements, you could have been given credit for your military time for the purpose of accrued leave. The requirements are very but very difficult to validate and they are subject to the interpretation of the person hiring you and civilian personnel. They have to show that unless you are offered the higher accrued leave, you will not take the job. They have to show all other candidates have turned down the job. They have to show that the position has a high turnover rate. Come on. It might be easier to suck a golf ball through a garden hose than getting this. The scuttlebutt here in HQ is that if you have a GS-15 ring knocker friend of yours and you are a ring knocker as well….he will take care of you by giving you this. I am selling it to you the same way it was sold to me by multiple people here in HQ. Bottom line, those of us appointed to a civilian position while on terminal leave regarding of how related our current job is to what we do now, thanks to our friends at DOD, we all got screwed! Despite, OPM initially indicating that we were entitled to the higher rate. I said it once and I’ll say it again…when we were active duty, we were on the left side of the balance sheet (Assets). When we retired, we were moved to the right side (Liabilities). The sad part is that there are those in AD that truly believe they will be taken care and appreciated when they are moved to the right side of the balance sheet. What a rude awakening they will have.