Docket No. AWG 23-405

FINAL DECISION

The Postal Service and the Treasury Department are seeking to collect a debt from Cidney Hancock by administrative wage garnishment. The debt is based on the cash value of Ms. Hancock’s negative annual leave balance when she separated from the Postal Service. The record establishes that she had a negative annual leave balance. But Ms. Hancock argues that she is not responsible for part of the debt because she never asked for, or used, annual leave during the relevant pay periods. As discussed below, however, the record does not support that assertion. The appeal is therefore denied. 

FINDINGS OF FACT

Ms. Hancock worked for the Postal Service at all times relevant to this dispute. Her last day in a pay status was July 8, 2020, although she did not officially separate from the Postal Service until December 2021. (Tr. 20–21, 41; Exh. 4 at 53). 
When Ms. Hancock separated from the Postal Service, she had a negative annual leave balance of 101.41 hours (Tr. 20–21, 41; Exh. 4 at 53; Exh. 5). Based on her hourly salary when she used those annual leave hours, the Postal Service calculated the value of the hours as $2,191 (Tr. 16–17). The Postal Service then invoiced Ms. Hancock for that amount in May 2022 (Exh. 3).  
Ms. Hancock did not respond to the invoice, so the Postal Service forwarded the debt to the Treasury Department for further collection action. The Treasury Department issued Ms. Hancock a Notice of Intent to Initiate Administrative Wage Garnishment in November 2022 (Exh. 2). In response, Ms. Hancock asked for a hearing to challenge the debt (Exh. 1). This petition followed, and a hearing was held in February 2024. 
At the hearing, an issue arose as to whether any part of the debt had already been collected. I therefore left the record open to allow the Postal Service to investigate that question. The Postal Service then filed a document showing that the debt has been satisfied in full (Document filed on February 21, 2024).  

DECISION

A retiring or separating employee’s negative annual leave balance equates to a salary overpayment, entitling the Postal Service to recover the monetary value of the paid but unearned annual leave. Employee and Labor Relations Manual (ELM) § 512.721. To recover the monetary value of the annual leave, the Postal Service must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that it made the salary overpayments, the amount of the overpayments, and that the employee was not entitled to them. Amerson v. United States Postal Service, AWG 21-319, 2022 WL 622379 (February 1, 2022); Reneau v. United States Postal Service, AO 15-211, 2016 WL 10572230 (August 2, 2016).  
In the context of a debt based on an annual leave balance, the Postal Service can prove that it made the salary overpayment by showing the employee’s annual leave balance when they separated from the Postal Service. The amount of the debt can be proved by showing the employee’s hourly salary rate for the overdrawn annual leave hours. The last element of proof—that the employee was not entitled to the overpayment—is normally presumed based on the applicable Postal Service regulation for unearned leave, ELM § 512.721.  
Here, the Postal Service has met that burden by a preponderance of the evidence. The payroll journals support a finding that Ms. Hancock had a negative annual leave balance of 101.41 hours when she separated from the Postal Service. The testimony of the Postal Service’s witness then proved the amount of the debt was based on Ms. Hancock’s hourly salary rate for the hours comprising the debt. Finally, there is no reason to question the applicability of ELM § 512.721 to the facts of this case.  
In her defense, Ms. Hancock argues that she did not use any annual leave in Pay Periods 2–6 in 2020, which account for 76.66 of the hours in dispute. The payroll journals, however, contradict this testimony. They prove that Ms. Hancock was paid for annual leave during those pay periods. Further, there were no records introduced (such as timesheets) that would contradict the payroll journals. And I note that the issue is not whether Ms. Hancock “used” the annual leave, but rather whether she was paid for it. The payroll journals show that she was paid. She has therefore not been able to overcome the persuasiveness of the payroll journals.   

ORDER

The petition is denied. Because the debt has been satisfied, however, the Postal Service and the Treasury Department may not take any further action to collect the debt by administrative wage garnishment.