P.S. Docket No. DCA 21-316

February 23, 2022

In the Matter of the Debt Collection Act Petition

P.S. Docket No. DCA 21-316

NATALIE BILLY v. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE

APPEARANCE FOR PETITIONER:
Natalie Billy

APPEARANCE FOR RESPONDENT:
Sherri Graves
Labor Relations Specialist
United States Postal Service

FINAL DECISION UNDER THE DEBT COLLECTION ACT OF 1982

To deal with COVID-19 pandemic, Congress passed the Family First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA).  Division E of the FFCRA is the Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act (EPSLA).  These statutes provided employees who were not able to work because of COVID with additional compensation.
Inadvertently, the Postal Service overpaid Natalie Billy by 24 hours of FFCRA leave while trying to implement the new laws.  The Postal Service also continued to pay Ms. Billy after the effective date of her resignation.  Finally, the Postal Service seeks to collect for overdrawn annual leave.  The Postal Service then assessed Ms. Billy with debts totaling $2,313.31 for salary overpayments.  Ms. Billy argues that she is entitled to the money under the law.  Her Petition challenging the debts is largely denied and only granted in small part.  Ms. Billy is credited with four hours of earned sick leave which reduces the overdrawn annual leave portion of the debt.  The debts are remanded to the parties for recalculation consistent with the terms of this Final Decision.

FINDINGS OF FACT

  1. In 2016, Natalie Billy began working for the Postal Service delivering mail in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (Tr. 93-94).
  2. In December 2019, Ms. Billy went to the hospital complaining of flu-like symptoms.  She was diagnosed with pneumonia and bronchitis.  Ms. Billy continued to experience flu-like symptoms for the next nine months.  (Tr. 98-100).
  3. Ms. Billy sought additional consultation with her doctor but was unable to schedule appointments in January and February 2020 (Tr. 101-02, 111-13).  Ms. Billy believes that she had either a serious medical condition which continued after her hospital visit in December 2019 or COVID from the end of 2019 and continuing into 2020 (Tr. 154-55).
  4. The COVID pandemic spread to the United States in February and March 2020 and has continued through the date of this Final Decision. https://www.cdc.gov/museum/timeline/covid19.html; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic_in_January_2020 (last viewed February 15, 2022).
  5. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Philadelphia area schools closed in March 2020.  Ms. Billy stayed home to take care of her three school-aged children while the schools were closed.  (Tr. 115-16).
  6. Ms. Billy requested and was paid for 504 hours of COVID leave in 2020 at a 2/3 rate of pay instead of the maximum of 480 hours resulting in a 24 hour overpayment (Tr. 58-60, 130, 146-47, 159; see also FFCRA, Pub. L. 116-127 (March 18, 2020); the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), Pub. L. 116-136 (March 27, 2020); Summary of Statutory and Regulatory Requirements in Connection with the Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act (EPSLA) – Application to Federal Employees (Office of Personnel Management, December 30, 2020)1).
  7. Effective November 8, 2020, Ms. Billy resigned from the Postal Service (Resp. Exh. 2).
  8. Inadvertently, the Postal Service continued to pay Ms. Billy after November 8, 2020 (Tr. 19; Resp. Exh. 1).
  9. The Postal Service assessed Ms. Billy with three debts totaling $2,313.31.  The Postal Service issued three invoices, one for each of the debts.  (Resp. Exh. 1).
  10. The first invoice, dated January 20, 2021, is for $1,257.54.  It is for the salary paid after Ms. Billy’s resignation.  It represents 17.5 hours of night differential, 56 hours of administrative leave, and eight hours of holiday pay after her last day in a pay status.  (Tr. 19; Resp. Exh. 1).
  11. The second invoice, dated February 17, 2021, is for $496.31.  The Postal Service seeks to collect for 24 hours (paid at 2/3 of the hourly rate) of overpaid FFCRA leave.  The $496.31 also includes additional hours which were paid after the effective date of Ms. Billy’s resignation, including five hours of night differential and eight hours of administrative leave which was not included in the first invoice.  (Tr. 19-20; Resp. Exh. 1).
  12. The third invoice, dated March 3, 2021, is for $559.46 representing 28 hours of overdrawn annual leave at the time Ms. Billy separated from the Postal Service.  Ms. Billy took advanced annual leave in 2020 in excess of what she eventually earned.  (Tr. 23, 31, 135-36; Resp. Exhs. 1, 4).
  13. Ms. Billy attempted to use all of her sick leave because of her flu-like symptoms.  She regularly called in to her post office and requested that sick leave be used.  On November 8, 2021, Ms. Billy had four hours of sick leave which she had wanted to use.  (Resp. Exh. 4; Tr. 77-78, 80-81, 83, 132).2

DECISION

The Postal Service has the initial burden of proving the existence and amount of the debt to a preponderance level of the evidence.  To meet this burden for the first debt, the Postal Service must show:  (1) the overpayments were made; (2) the amount of the overpayments; and, (3) that Ms. Billy is not entitled to the overpayments.  See, e.g., Calhoun v. United States Postal Service, AWG 21-218, 2021 WL 5824359 (November 23, 2021); Reid v. United States Postal Service, DCA 19-392, 2021 WL 1390580 (March 16, 2021).  If the Postal Service meets this burden, the burden shifts to Ms. Billy who must show to a preponderance level of the evidence that no debt exists or that the amount of the debt is incorrect.  Id; see also 31 C.F.R. § 285.11(f)(8)(ii).
The Postal Service has shown that it inadvertently made payments to Ms. Billy for hours she did not work after the effective date of her resignation.  The Postal Service also showed that it paid her for more than the maximum allowable hours at a 2/3 rate.  The Postal Service also showed that it paid Ms. Billy for the other hours identified in the invoices.  When combined, these hours are valued at $2,313.31.  In short, the Postal Service has met its initial burden of proving the debt.
Ms. Billy raises several defenses which are directed towards the amounts identified in the three invoices.

Payments after Resignation (The First Invoice and Part of Second Invoice)
The Postal Service has shown that it paid Ms. Billy for 64 hours of administrative leave, 22.5 hours of night differential, and eight hours of holiday pay after November 8, 2020, her last day in a pay status. 
Ms. Billy argues that the Postal Service double-billed eight hours of holiday pay because it appears on the second invoice.  The pay records and credible testimony show that even though administrative leave appears on both the first and second invoices for pay period 24-2020, it was not double-billed.  Ms. Billy did not provide evidence to support her argument.
Ms. Billy makes the same argument regarding five hours of night differential included in the second invoice.  A review of the pay records shows that it was not double-billed.3
Ms. Billy also argues that the Postal Service’s pay records showed that when she left the Postal Service, she was overdrawn by 12, 16, or 28 hours of annual leave.  Because there are three different numbers in her pay records, she argues that the Postal Service’s calculations are wrong and that either 12 or 16 hours should be used instead of 28 hours.  While those numbers appear in the pay records for pay periods before her resignation, a reconciliation of the pay records completed after her resignation shows that the Postal Service overpaid her for 28 hours of annual leave that she used but did not earn.  Ms. Billy’s argument is not supported by the facts.

Sick Leave
Ms. Billy also argues that the $2,313.31 should be offset by her earned sick leave.  We will offset debts to the extent that money is owed when the facts are so closely intertwined that they cannot be separated.  Ashley A. Nokes, DCA 14-149, 2014 WL 12767839 (July 16, 2014).  From December 2019 through her resignation, Ms. Billy credibly testified that she experienced flu symptoms similar to those associated with COVID. 
In submitting leave, Ms. Billy had requested that her sick leave be used to the maximum extent practicable to avoid paid administrative leave, leave without pay, or overdrawn annual leave.  Based on reductions for sick leave in the pay period 20-2020 records, her supervisors had submitted her sick leave request for 24 of 28 earned sick leave hours.  Ms. Billy had an additional four hours of earned sick leave which could have been used in pay periods 20 through 24 of 2020 which would have reduced her overdrawn annual leave.  On the use of sick leave, Ms. Billy provided credible testimony that she requested the use of the 28 hours.  These four hours would have reduced her assessed debts.  Her credible testimony that she was sick (entitling her to use sick leave) is not challenged by the Postal Service (additionally, the Postal Service did not produce any 2020 leave forms signed by Ms. Billy which might have rebutted this testimony).  I conclude that it was an inadvertent error that her sick leave request was not submitted to finance.

Order
The Petition is largely denied and granted only in small part.  The Postal Service has shown that it is entitled to collect the debts identified in the three invoices.  Ms. Billy has shown that the overdrawn annual leave should be reduced by four hours of earned sick leave.
Within four weeks of receiving this Final Decision, the parties shall file a joint status report identifying their revised calculations.  If the parties cannot agree on the contents of the status report, they may file separate status reports.  I retain jurisdiction over the recalculated debts.

Peter F. Pontzer
Administrative Judge


1 On December 30, 2020, OPM summarized the interaction between EPSLA, FFCRA, the CARES Act, and the Emergency Family and Medical Leave Act, along with the implementing regulations issued by the Department of Labor.

2 The Postal Service did not produce the leave forms which were completed by the office after Ms. Billy called.

3 Ms. Billy may be arguing that the Postal Service made the error of paying her after she resigned which allows her to keep the overpayment.  We have regularly held that an administrative error causing an overpayment does not entitle the employee to retain the overpayment.  Dawkins v. Internal Revenue Service, IRS 16-287, 2017 WL 8728691 (May 15, 2017).