Army Reservist Uses Supposed Deployment to Commit Fraud Against Local Police Department
What I am wondering about most with this story is why is the police department paying their officers for up to 30 days pay when they are getting a paycheck already from the military when on orders? This is just another example of good intentions creating an incentive for people like this guy to cheat the taxpayer:
A former police officer with a little more than a year on the job has been arrested for going on a Hawaiian vacation with his girlfriend while he was receiving full pay from the department while he was purportedly on a deployment with the US Army Reserves, police said.
In a press release from Lt. Sean Cooney, commander of the Stamford police department’s Internal Affairs Division, recently resigned police officer Donald Chen, 30, has been charged with first-degree larceny and defrauding a public community and was released without bond.
“I’m extremely disappointed with what happened,” police Chief Jon Fontneau said Tuesday morning. Fontneau said that the department supports their military veterans in every way it can, including allowing them to go on deployments for up to 30 days a year with pay. “What we found to be was a case of fraud committed not only to the city of Stamford and its taxpayers and the U.S. Government,” he said.
Fontneau said that Chen, a former member of the US Army, resigned from the department before he could be fired. “He would have been fired,” Fontneau said. Chen will not receive a pension or any kind of a pay out. Fontneau said that the department will ask that prosecutors on Chen’s case apply for restitution of more than $2,000 that he was being paid for by the city for his military service. [Stars and Stripes]
You can read the rest at the link.
“What I am wondering about most with this story is why is the police department paying their officers for up to 30 days pay when they are getting a paycheck already from the military when on orders? “
I wonder about that too.
Strange.
“Why is the police department paying their officers for up to 30 days pay when they are getting a paycheck already from the military when on orders?”
It’s a fairly common practice for municipal employees (police, fire fighters, etc) to receive their pay while deployed. I was deployed with a reserve Major whose day job was working for the NYC Metro Rail. He got his full pay for the entire six months he was deployed. It’s less common among non-municipal employers, but I know that Wachovia Bank, Eaton Corp, and Enterprise Rent-A-Car keep their employees on full salary and benefits, regardless of military compensation, when they are called to active duty in the Reserves and National Guard.
For a lot of people, the military pay (especially if you are enlisted) is less than what you get at your day job, so to retain good employees who want to also serve in the reserves, some employers continue to pay employees some or all of their pay. There are other variations, such as employers who pay the difference between the employee’s military pay and day job pay.
Bottom Line: it’s a common practice.
That’s interesting, guitard. I had no idea. I’m still kind of surprised. There doesn’t seem to be much reason for any private business to do this. If they pay better than the Reserve job, that would seem incentive to pick the private job over the reserve one. I don’t see how an employer would benefit from paying an employee during a time he or she is not on the job, for the duration of military orders.
My husband is a reservist and he works for a very good company, but they don’t do that.
Here’s an article that discusses this matter:
http://www.shrm.org/publications/hrmagazine/editorialcontent/pages/0707agenda_compben.aspx
Guitard I am surprised as well because you would think with basic pay plus BAH and any combat or separation pay would be comparable to the money most people would be bringing in on the civilian side.
I just realized that article link I posted doesn’t actually go to the article. Here is the beginning text of the article:
Employers who offer military differential pay should also offer tips for dealing with the tax rules
When U.S. Naval Reserve Lt. Marc J. Soss was called to active duty last year, his employer gave him more than a goodbye. Because Soss earned much more as a tax attorney than as a military officer, his law firm offered him a stipend for six months to help fill the gap between his military pay and his regular salary.
The firm also gave Soss money it received from a Florida grant program for private-sector employers who pay workers called to active duty. Soss, who left his family in Sarasota, Fla., to serve in Afghanistan, says that “it was very generous” of his firm to supplement his military pay. He returned to the law firm in May after 14 months of military duty.
The payments that Soss received from his employer, called military differential pay, are strictly voluntary. The law that protects the civilian jobs and benefits of employees called to active duty—the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994, or USERRA—doesn’t require employers to pay anything to employees called to active duty with the Reserves or the National Guard.
But many employers offer military differential pay. Some even continue to pay full salary, whether it’s for two weeks of regular training or two years in a war zone.
Employers’ reasons for offering military differential pay can range from patriotism or a wish to ease soldiers’ financial burdens to a desire to retain employees after their military duty ends.
“If your human capital strategy is based on recruiting and retaining employees, military differential pay is an effective method for developing loyal employees,” says Air Force Maj. Rob Palmer, spokesman for the National Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR), a Department of Defense agency that promotes cooperation between service members and their civilian employers.
– See more at: http://www.shrm.org/publications/hrmagazine/editorialcontent/pages/0707agenda_compben.aspx#sthash.gGh3kb33.dpuf