Retroactive Promotion and Backpay

An Army employee appealed a GAO decision denying his claim for a retroactive promotion and backpay. The employee had filed a formal grievance with the Army alleging improper rating, ranking, and certification for higher grade positions. The employee, who was ultimately promoted, contended that he was entitled to a retroactive promotion and backpay because: (1) the Army violated its own grievance procedures by not rendering a decision within 90 days from the date the grievance was filed; and (2) Army officials intentionally delayed the processing of his grievance. The Army contended that the delay in processing of the employee's grievance was not solely the result of action or inaction on the part of management officials, but was also caused by employee requests for postponement, agreements allowing additional time for the review of records, and the conflicting schedules of the employee and management officials. GAO found that: (1) the Army did not violate any regulations which were absolute or nondiscretionary in nature and, therefore, did not make any unjustified or unwarranted personnel action which could justify a retroactive promotion and backpay; (2) while some of the delays in processing the grievance may have been caused by Army officials, there was no indication that the delays were deliberate; and (3) the employee had no vested right to be promoted, even though he was a priority candidate. Accordingly, the claim was sustained.