Use of Lengthy Excused Absence Criticized

GAO has examined the use of excused absence, or administrative leave, finding that in some cases employees are on such leave for lengthy periods, being paid their normal salaries but not allowed to work. It estimated that over the 2011-2013 period, agencies spent about 1 percent of their total salary expenses, about $3 billion, on administrative leave. For all but three percent of employees who took such leave, the total time off was less than 20 working days, and the leave mainly was granted for reasons such as office closings due to weather emergencies or other natural disasters, time off to donate blood, excused absences around Christmas, and rest periods on return from assignment overseas or from active military duty. However, more than 57,000 employees were on a total of more than a month of administrative leave over the period—about 4,000 of those more than three months and 263 of them more than a year—accounting for about a quarter of the cost of all such leave. In most cases, it said, those were employees who had been notified of intended disciplinary action against them and were awaiting a final agency decision. GAO noted that while agencies have authority to keep employees on paid leave for in those circumstances, that is meant to be used only rarely. It also found that agencies are inconsistent regarding what types of paid time off from work they consider to be administrative leave. The report could lead to changes in policies: a number of members of Congress have written to agencies demanding an explanation, and have indicated that they will sponsor legislation to tighten controls over the practice. One particular concern is that agencies are usingthe leave as a form of whistleblower retaliation.