A-25203, DECEMBER 15, 1928, 8 COMP. GEN. 301

A-25203: Dec 15, 1928

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED AS A REQUEST FOR ACTION BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD ON THE EXISTING ALLOCATION OF THE POSITIONS TO WHICH THE COMPARISON IS MADE. THE REALLOCATION DOWNWARD OF THE EXISTING ALLOCATION OF THE POSITIONS TO WHICH COMPARISON IS MADE ON SUCH A BASIS BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD. IS WITHOUT EFFECT TO REDUCE THE SALARY RATE OF THE EMPLOYEE. AS FOLLOWS: I HAVE THE HONOR TO INVITE YOUR ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING ACTION TAKEN BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD IN THE CASES OF MISS CLARA M. ORMOND WERE ALLOCATED TO GRADE CAF-5. TILLOTSON WAS ALLOCATED TO GRADE CAF-4. MY ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD WAS THAT THE THREE POSITIONS SHOULD BE ALLOCATED TO GRADE CAF-5.

A-25203, DECEMBER 15, 1928, 8 COMP. GEN. 301

CLASSIFICATION OF CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES - AUTHORITY OF PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD TO REALLOCATE POSITIONS AS AFFECTING SALARY PAYMENTS A REFERENCE TO THE EXISTING ALLOCATION OF POSITIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPARISON EITHER BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OR BY AN EMPLOYEE UPON APPEAL, IN CONNECTION WITH REQUESTS SUBMITTED TO THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD FOR ALLOCATION OR REALLOCATION OF OTHER POSITIONS, MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED AS A REQUEST FOR ACTION BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD ON THE EXISTING ALLOCATION OF THE POSITIONS TO WHICH THE COMPARISON IS MADE, AND THE REALLOCATION DOWNWARD OF THE EXISTING ALLOCATION OF THE POSITIONS TO WHICH COMPARISON IS MADE ON SUCH A BASIS BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD, IS WITHOUT EFFECT TO REDUCE THE SALARY RATE OF THE EMPLOYEE.

COMPTROLLER GENERAL MCCARL TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF TAX APPEALS, DECEMBER 15, 1928:

CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN GIVEN TO YOUR LETTER OF NOVEMBER 20, 1928, AS FOLLOWS:

I HAVE THE HONOR TO INVITE YOUR ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING ACTION TAKEN BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD IN THE CASES OF MISS CLARA M. ROWZEE AND MRS. FLORENCE J. ORMOND, EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD.

BY ACTION SHEET NO. 11839, RECEIVED BY THE BOARD ON JULY 31, 1928, THE POSITIONS OF MISS ROWZEE AND MRS. ORMOND WERE ALLOCATED TO GRADE CAF-5. BY ACTION SHEET NO. 11824, RECEIVED THE SAME DAY, THE POSITION OF MISS ERA M. TILLOTSON WAS ALLOCATED TO GRADE CAF-4. AS THE THREE EMPLOYEES WORK IN THE SAME ROOM AND ALONG WHAT I CONSIDER SIMILAR LINES OF DUTIES, MY ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD WAS THAT THE THREE POSITIONS SHOULD BE ALLOCATED TO GRADE CAF-5. ACCORDINGLY, ON AUGUST 3, 1928, A LETTER WAS ADDRESSED TO THE SECRETARY OF THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD, CALLING ATTENTION TO THE DISCREPANCY IN ALLOCATION AND THE RESULTING CREATION OF AN EXTREMELY DIFFICULT SITUATION VIEWED FROM THE STANDPOINT OF PERSONNEL. FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF THE MATTER WAS URGED. FOLLOWING THIS COMMUNICATION, AN INVESTIGATOR OF THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD CALLED AND MADE A STUDY OF THE THREE POSITIONS. SUBSEQUENTLY, I WAS ADVISED INFORMALLY THAT THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD HAD UNDER CONSIDERATION THE MATTER OF REDUCING THE ALLOCATION OF MISS ROWZEE AND MRS. ORMOND FROM GRADE CAF-5 TO CAF-4, THUS PLACING THEM ON A PARITY WITH MISS TILLOTSON, RATHER THAN INCREASING MISS TILLOTSON TO GRADE CAF-5 AND PLACING HER ON A PARITY WITH THE OTHER TWO EMPLOYEES. A LETTER OF PROTEST WAS ADDRESSED TO THE BOARD AND AN ORAL HEARING WAS GRANTED. ON NOVEMBER 17, 1928, THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD ADVISED ME THAT, BY ITS ACTION SHEET 312912, IT HAD REVIEWED THE ALLOCATION PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FOR MISS ROWZEE AND MRS. ORMOND, AND HAD PLACED THEIR POSITIONS IN GRADE CAF-4.

IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT NO REQUEST HAS BEEN MADE OF THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD TO REVIEW ITS FORMER ACTION IN APPLYING GRADE CAF 5 TO THE POSITIONS OCCUPIED BY MISS ROWZEE AND MRS. ORMOND, I HAVE THE HONOR TO REQUEST YOUR DECISION AS TO HOW THIS ACTION OF THE BOARD SHALL BE APPLIED FOR PAY PURPOSES TO THE EMPLOYEES CONCERNED. MISS ROWZEE IS RECEIVING COMPENSATION AT THE OF $2,200 PER ANNUM, AND MRS. ORMOND AT THE RATE OF $2,000 PER ANNUM.

THE SUBMISSION OF THE THREE POSITIONS FOR ALLOCATION OF A GRADE DOES NOT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN ON THE BASIS OF THE THREE POSITIONS BEING SO CONNECTED THAT ACTION ON ONE NECESSARILY REQUIRED ACTION ON THE OTHERS, SO THAT WHEN THE GRADING OF THE THREE WAS ACCOMPLISHED AND THE QUESTION AROSE AS TO THE ONE IT DID NOT NECESSARILY REQUIRE RECONSIDERATION OF THE OTHER TWO. IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE BOARD HAS NOT REPORTED IN CONNECTION WITH ITS ACTION ANY SPECIFIC ERROR OF FACT IN THE GRADING OF THE PRIOR TWO BUT HAS SIMPLY REVISED OR REVERSED ITS FORMER ACTION WITHOUT ANY STATEMENT OF FACTS AS TO THE REASON THEREFOR, NEITHER THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE NOR THE EMPLOYEES IN QUESTION HAVING REQUESTED FURTHER ACTION BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD WITH RESPECT TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ALLOCATIONS OF THE POSITIONS HELD BY MISS CLARA M. ROWZEE AND MRS. FLORENCE J. ORMOND. A REFERENCE TO THE EXISTING ALLOCATION OF POSITIONS FOR THE PURPOSES OF COMPARISON, EITHER BY THE ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OR BY AN EMPLOYEE UPON APPEAL, IN CONNECTION WITH REQUESTS SUBMITTED TO THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD FOR ALLOCATION OR REALLOCATION OF OTHER POSITIONS, MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED AS A REQUEST FOR ACTION BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD ON THE EXISTING ALLOCATION OF THE POSITIONS TO WHICH THE COMPARISON IS MADE.

IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD HAS NO POWER UNDER THE ORIGINAL CLASSIFICATION ACT TO REVIEW, ON ITS OWN MOTION, IN THE ABSENCE OF A REQUEST OR RECOMMENDATION BY AN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OR AN APPEAL BY THE EMPLOYEE, ANY ALLOCATION PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY IT. SEE DECISION OF JUNE 26, 1928, 7 COMP. GEN. 820, 825; DECISION OF DECEMBER 12, 1928, A-25355, 8 COMP. GEN. 296, ADDRESSED TO THE SECRETARY OF WAR, AND THE OPINION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DATED FEBRUARY 1, 1924, 34 OP.ATTY.GEN. 98, 100.

YOU ARE ADVISED, THEREFORE, THAT IF AT THE TIME THE ACTION HERE IN QUESTION WAS TAKEN BY THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD THERE WAS NOT THEN PENDING BEFORE IT ANY REQUEST OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OR APPEAL BY THE EMPLOYEES FOR A CHANGE IN THE THEN EXISTING PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ALLOCATION OF THESE TWO POSITIONS, THE ACTION OF THE PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD PURPORTING TO REALLOCATE SAID POSITIONS FROM GRADE CAF-5 TO GRADE CAF-4 WAS WITHOUT EFFECT TO CHANGE THE SALARY RATES OF THE EMPLOYEES, WHICH MAY CONTINUE TO BE PAID IN GRADE CAF-5. SEE DECISION OF NOVEMBER 8, 1928, A-24901, 8 COMP. GEN. 248.