78 A.D.2d 832 | N.Y. App. Div. | 1980
Order and judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County, entered December 27,1979, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to reduce petitioner’s overtime credit solely to the period during which he served as first deputy police commissioner and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. Petitioner, after 34 years of service as a career police officer, was named first deputy police commissioner on January 14,1974. The highest position held by him in the uniformed force was that of deputy chief inspector. Despite his appointment as first deputy police commissioner, he retained his position in the uniformed force until August 20, 1975, when he retired therefrom. Upon his retirement, he waived his rights to accrued overtime, annual leave and terminal leave. At the time of petitioner’s appointment as first deputy police commissioner, the right to overtime pay was governed by Personnel Order No. 41/72 which provided that for managerial employees (into which category petitioner fell), overtime was to be divided into two categories. One half of such overtime was to be accumulated in an active ovértime bank while the balance was to go into a reserve overtime bank. The reserve overtime bank could be used only in the case of catastrophic illness and then only if all sick leave, annual leave and active overtime bank reserves had been exhausted. Active overtime bank reserves could be used for compensatory time off up to a maximum of 12 days per year. Up to 100 days of overtime accumulated in the active overtime bank could be applied to a lump-sum payment upon retirement. Personnel Order No. 41/72 was superseded by Personnel Order No. 24/77, which became effective on June 17,1977. That order limited overtime to work in excess of 40 hours per week. It consolidated the active and reserve overtime banks and provided for a lump-sum payment on final separation on the basis of a maximum of 10 days’ overtime for each year of continuous city service not exceeding a total of 100 days. Additionally, accruals for annual leave and terminal leave were to be included in the lump-sum payment. Petitioner retired on December 31, 1977. It is, therefore, unnecessary for us to concern ourselves with the personnel order