USVI Public Records

Document text

IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. CROIX AT CHRISTIANSTED FELIX CANCEL Plaintiff CIVIL NO. 1614/1981 vs. ACTION FOR WAGES DUE GOVERNMENT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS Defendant EDDY RIVERA, ESQUIRE 38 King Street Christiansted, St. Croix -~Attorney for Plaintiff JO-ANN WEBB ANDERSON, ESQUIRE Assistant Attorney General Department of Law P.O. Box 1074 Christiansted, St. Croix --Attorney for Defendant FINCH, Judge MEMORANDUM OPINION This cause came on to be heard on June 3, 1982 upon plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and defendant's Cross- Motion for Summary Judgment. This court having heard argu- ments and based on the following reasons, will grant plain- — tiff's motion for summary judgment. + FACTS Plaintiff, Felix Cancel, a lieutenant on the police fopee tues appointed Acting Deputy Chief of Police on Septem-— ber 27, 1979 by then Commissioner Milton Branch of the Virgin Islands Department of Public Safety. Plaintiff served in his "acting" capacity from Septem- ber 27, 1979 to March 31, 1981, and received compensation as lieutenant at an annual salary of $21,296.00. en | TE Nae Oo: einen aeRO allen wot = oh een onthe emnaee nei - oe ann lain ode werd aaa | Som aoe, REE Memorandum Opinion Cancel vs. Govt. Page 2 The position of Deputy Chief of Police was unfunded from September 27, 1979 to October 1, 1980. On October 23, 1980 Act No. 4498 was Ese and thereby provided funds for the position of Deputy Chief of Police, effective October 1, 1980, at an annual salary of $23,500.00. Plaintiff, however, was not granted the salary of deputy chief of police. Although the position was funded, plaintiff was not paid the salary of deputy chief. On December 29, 1980, Executive Order No. 242/81 was ap- proved. This order granted a fifteen percent increase retro- active to October 1, 1980 to all non-union employees. The plaintiff was a member of this class of employees and, there- fore, entitled to the 15% increase. Yet, plaintiff did not receive this 15% increase. DISCUSSION The first issue presented is whether plaintiff is en- titled to compensation as the deputy chief of police when in an "acting" capacity. Plaintiff takes the position that he is entitled to the salary of deputy chief once the position became funded, Pur~ Suant to Act. No. 4498 for the period October 1, 1980 to March 31P 1981. The defendant takes the position that plaintiff is not en- titled to compensation at the deputy chief salary because Sec- tion 4(a) of Executive Order No. 242/81 provides for only "acting" department or agency heads to receive the full salary of the position they are filling and the position filled by the plaintiff is not that of a department nor agency head. Act No. 4498, approved on October 23, 1980, included in Tt a list of all classified, unclassified and temporary positions of the Government of the Virgin Islands. This list, which is styled a "Position Supplement," included the position of wes oa: ae Aan ge Se oe ee etre ee or eee Memorandum Opinion Cancel vs. Govt. Page 3 Deputy Chief of Police for St. Croix. Act No. 4498 also provides in pertinent part that: "not- withstanding any other provisions of law of law to the con- trary, no person shall be paid less than the amount provided for his or her position in the Position Supplement". Title 3 V.I.C. §552 (Suppl. ) states: | "It is the policy of the Virgin Islands Government to provide equal pay for equal work ..." Lt. Cancel was functioning as Deputy Chief, though in an "“act- ing" capacity. Therefore, he should be compensated for any work done as deputy chief at the rate of compensation for deputy chief. In addition, since the position of deputy chief appears in the Position Supplement and since Act No. 4498 ex- pressly provides for the payment of the salary called for in the Position Supplement, Lt. Cancel is therefore entitled to | ‘be paid the salary of deputy chief for the period October 1, | 1980 through March 31, 1981. ‘The Government of the Virgin Is- | lands will be ordered to pay Lt. Cancel $2,864.50 for the period he served as Acting Deputy Chief of Police. Plaintiff next argues that he is entitled to the fifteen : percent across the board Peron nat rica April 1, 1981 to present. He opines that once he ceased serving in the position of “Acting Deputy Chief" and returned to his position as lieu- * tenant his salary should have been increased by fifteen percent in accordance with Executive Order No. 242/81. In oral argument, the Government conceded the fact that plaintiff is entitled to the fifteen percent increase. Executive Order No. 242/81 dated December 29, 1980 granted a fifteen percent increase retroactive to October li, 1980 to all non-union employees. Plaintiff was a member of the class of employees entitled to the fifteen percent increase. However, plaintiff to date has yet to receive the monies to which he is entitled. — Pee Memorandum Opinion Cancel vs. Govt. Page 3 Plaintiff's salary as lieutenant is $21,296.00 yearly. By adding the fifteen percent increase, the salary would be $24,490.40 yearly, an increase of $3,194.40 yearly. This court finds that plaintiff is entitled to the fifteen percent increase to become effective for the period April 1, 1981 to present. DATED: ale des Jvc hie Dy ay L. Finch,/ Judge i, Stee ete te OE aE eee