OCR Text |
Show THE DAILY RECORD FOUR PAGE ' Financing Statements Douglas 1. ! oh, t42 Jen Cr Co; hh gds 4th S J sle tc Raymond F Stsam, 3?4 Hudson Avo, jon Cr Co; hh gds US Kenneth W Lindsey, 6094 lenoaks, Murray to Fid Ind Cr Co; hh gds Queen Mine, Inc, Mtn Mach Co; 3ackhoe rocky Paul 1st See B W 2 E Clark, Cr Co; hh gds Sheldon D sle to Fin Co; Chattle Mtge Met Kent G Scow, 3650 Fin Co; hh Fhm 5725 S sle to W, SLC slo to SL Fin Co; Chattl Mtge Russell 0 C Hal Lucille C Briggs, 16454 to Ut Central; Bt, Mtr Samao Wfcy, Allan Pete Grsange, 518 E Utah Chtrl; hh gds to UNIVAC Donald Lofshult, 3714 cr K Wesley to IN I S 2940 E, Ba Fed Cr Uh; Stock S sle to slo to one-ha- Salary suggests regular compensation at fixed periods without regard to the number of days actually worked so long as the employee is in good standing with his employer. Thus, providing there be no agreement to the contrary, an employee on salary might reasonably expect to receive his regular salary even though he missed an occasional day's work due to illness or otherwise; and compensation paid during vacations incident to the position is ordinarily based upon the Fed Eta la P Garcia, salary regularly paid. Traditionally "salary" does not seem to have encompassed situations where additional Car, Camper WAy, Floyd F Bircumshaw, 4820 Fed Eta Cr Uh; hh gds W slo to Fed The phrase "time and half" more terms sounds of in pay special compensation for extra work, rather than a regular rate of compensation. pay S, Keam 4865 7th E, slo to Fsd slo Howard D Morre, 1178 to Fed Eta Cr Un; Bt, El Sendero Cr, ale Mtr, Trlr Iynn FTew, 3203 Kenvd St, slo to Brohd of Bray Clerks Cr Uh; Mtr Alfonso Broshd A of Dale 0 Jackman, 649 E17th S, Meadow Gold Eta Cr Uh; E Larsen, Wyooff EtaCr Uh; Cars, sic to TV 2736 Melbourne, Car, hh gds. T Broshd Archuleta, 672 S 6th E, slo to Rway Clerks, 226 Uh Pao Depot Frig, Wash sle to Eugene Broshd I John E Broshd Versluis, of Bray Clerks, Car, hh gds sle to Guns MoLane, 384 Navajo St, of Bray Clerks; Rsnge Hecht, 963 Hollyvd Ave, sle to of Bray Clerks; Stereo, 535 N 1st W, TV - we tional slo to and contemporary common usage. all the circumstances is for the two extra days per month the three days pay that was not salary within the statutory meaning. The conclusion we draw from Attorney General flp?mnn OPINION NO. of- think the statutory language connotes a rate of regular, periodic compensation so as to exclude special compensation which is payable only where services are actually rendered for a longer time than the regular working hours of a compensation period. The preference for constructions relatively more beneficial to the pensioner is insufficient to compel a different construction from that which seems indicated by the word "salary" in its context, as tested by tradi- B John examination' Here, Car, hh gds Putman, 979 Debonair Dr, slo SLC Firman's Cr Uh; Car, hh gds is given for overtime. the stipulation of facts and other decuments constituting the record in this case discloses that the compensation for the two allotted days off for each month is neither regular nor fixed in the sense that a designated amount would be paid regularly whether the hours were actually worked or not. The stipulation discloses also that the compensation of three days pay for the two allotted days off was not received unless the work was actually performed. An sle to 413 Sherman Ave, Eugene L Moon, 945 S Cr Uh; Car, hh gds sle State ex rel. Murray v. Riley. 70 Al.2d 712 (Del. 1949), the case preceding the above referenced annotation, held that the pension of a retired fireman should not be based on overtime pay. The court was construing a Delaware statute which provided lf a pension of ", . . of the amount of his salary at the time of retirement. .", and in the course of the opinion it said: Eceles, I563 Paradise Lane, ale to Fred J McNamara, 3953 Lanes St, sle to Cr Uh; Ckr, hh gds Jaek 10, Marty Payne, 3015 Maple Em Cr Uh; Bt, Mtr, Trlr UNIVAC SLC Eta Fed to $eak, eto Aug), Fad Em Cr Uh; TV S Cruapley, 4280 S 3425 W, UilVAC SLC Eta Fsd Cr Un; Camper Duma sic Fed Ba Cr Uh; Oars, hh gds An Geraldine to N to S 5770 W, slo Uh; Canper Steinburg, 3829 VAC SLC 350 E, Russell Berry, 1033 Riches, sle to W W UNIVAC SLC Em Fed A Fed Eta Cr Uh; 6th S, sle to benefits. Uh; Cknper Grant sle 3500 S, Magna to SLC Bn Fed Cr Ita; Camper Doris J Rye, 8701 Uh; Car, Roger N Taylor, 213 F S?f Cr Uh; Car, hh gds 'Martha Johansen, 67 66 S 1495 E, slo to Ford Ktr Cr Co; hh gds work performed was not subject to withholding for the and not properly includable as a basis for pension fund pension Wall, 8272 S 6th E, sandy to Fed E Eta Cr sle to Jones, 956 A E 5th S, Tanner Jewelry Co; Ring set S Eta Cr S Susan Vickrey, 222 L St Davis Qity Sch Eta; TV Uller' sle to Chatterley, 32 is on for extra Tel L sle to Hestand v. Erke. 298 S.W.2d 44 (Ark. 1957) all fours with the case at hand, except factually is that the plaintiff there was a policeman instead of a fireman. The Arkansas Supreme Court held that the extra pay given him Such a case which SL Soott Collett, 4236 S 14th E, sic to Eta Cr Uh; Csr, hh gds R TV Hagen, 821 Dwngton Ave, Wm S we deem tirement contributions. Stahr, 2625 Hartford, sle to Cr Uh; Cars, hh gds Eta to si Tel Dale Luck, 1250 E 10265 S, Sandy to Lin Accept Corp; hh gds Lin Aeeet Corp; Tel SL sle to decisions which payments received by the employee in deciding what should or should not be included as income for fixing the amount of re- Er, slo to David Wateoan, 5520 S 540 W, Tel Em Cr Uh; Car, Sleeper Gen sle to 125 FTeemont Ave, 5th V, slo to Truman Moss, 834 Polnsettia SL Tel Eta Or Uh; hh gds Glenda Stella Aragon, which Newton, 3475 Santa Rosa Ave, Tel Em Cr Uh; Car, hh gds G Douglas 72, to be controlling are those use statutes that "monthly interpret salary" as the basis for contributions and which emphasize the regularity of the The SL Kimball Equip Co, 1846 S 2nd W,slc to Koehrlng DLv; Hoe, Equip Box 15 00 Car, hh gds N 69-0- sides of this question. 5th S, slo to E noted in our Opinion No. issued July 16, 1969. That opinion dealt with the related question of whether or not vacation pay to a policeman was to included as a basis for retirement benefits. We there held that the vacation pay was to be included, but the language of the statute there under consideration is sufficiently different from that quoted above as to require an opposite conclusion here. The authorities on both sides of the question are annotated at 14 ALR.2d 634, and in the Later Case Service thereto, and the reader is referred to the text and cited cases found there for a more thorough examination of the decisions on both sle 1134 Victoria Way, Washer A Dryer Robert J Martines, 118 Tel Eta Cr Uh; TV Gen Kenneth L O Car Uki; Hales, 1453 Colony Dr, sle to Flrmen's Cr Ih Cars, hh gds Russell A Lundberg, 2962 3 3175 S, sle to Sentry Th Oorp; hh gds Howard P Foley Co, P Empire Mach Co; Mach Uh SL Monte F sle to Jensen, 860 Slmondl, Castle, M Teaah Cr SLC SL Teach Cr On; sle to Regal St, slo to teaah Cr SL Janet L Wiliams, 1144 9th 3, sle to 1st 330 3 1300 S, James Gallegos, Cr Co; hh gds Gen to of Ut; Camper John W Overly, 2937 S See B of Ut; Organ Michael Eleanor sle to 1720 Windsor St, D Adamson, Pearson, to Samuel E hh gds sle to Silver Star Bos Ba Cr Rena M MItchall, 659 S 4th E, Tosoh Cr On Car, hh gds 6, sle to E Uamiok, 672 EL950 So, slo to Ub Rings La Mar MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1970 70-0- 64 interesting case, similar in effect but with its facts reversed, is Douglas v. Pension Board of City of Sacramento. 242 P. 756 (Cal. 1925). In that case the city employee was lf of the entitled to an annual pension equal to . him one The to ." retirement. his year prior salary paid Board Mandamus a Pension to the of Writ compel pensioner sought amount an to of the City of San Francisco to raise his pension lf of what his salary should have been, i.e., equal to the salary for the office which he held at the time he retired. The problem arose from the fact that he had been ill during the last year of his employment and had actually received about 25 per cent less than the salary which the position called for. An November BY: REQUESTED PREPARED 17, 1970 "... Leonard McDonald, Executive Director, Utah State Retirement Board W. Vernon B. Romney, Attorney General K. Roger Bean, Assistant Attorney General BY: one-ha- extra payments made by a fire department to firemen for extra services, performed during off duty hours, subject to retirement contributions under the provisions of Sec. 2, Are QUESTION: 49-6-- U.C.A. 1953? No. CONCLUSION: city fire department is considering calling off duty firemen into extra fire fighting work, additional to their regular shift, for which they would be given additional pay A over and above their regular monthly salary. Sec. Pension Fund Act) men Does U.C.A. 1953, within the State the extra court held that the words "salary paid to him" meant the compensation which had been provided for the position or office of employment whose duties he was required to perform and that his pension should be based upon that salary regardless of the number of days he actually worked during the year. The similar decision is Pless v. Franks. 308 S.W.2d 402, (Tenn. 1957) in which the court construed the words "basic salary" and concluded that it meant the salary which the pensioner was receiving at the time of his retirement without taking into consideration extra pay given for extra work. A the language of the statute in question, the basis of decisions from other states construing similar statutory language, is that the proposed extra pay to firemen for extra services to be rendered would not be subject to retirement contributions. part of the Firemens1 states in pertinent part: To the fund so created and maintained shall be added 5 per cent of the monthly salaries of all paid fire49-6-- 2, (a and on . . . (emphasis added) for extra services constitute a part of the "monthly salaries" of the firemen? We think the answer must be in the negative. pay Our opinion, from Respectfully submitted. VERNON There admittedly is a split in the decided cases, as one-ha- we B. ROMNEY Attorney General |