B-169416, AUG. 12, 1970

B-169416: Aug 12, 1970

Additional Materials:

Contact:

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

 

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

EMPLOYEE WHO COMPLAINS THAT HIS POSITION AS GS-12 CHEMICAL ENGINEER WAS IN EFFECT REDUCED WHEN UNDER A REORGANIZATION A NEW SUPERVISORY GS 14 WAS ESTABLISHED. ON APPEAL TO CSC THE COMPLAINT WAS DENIED MAY NOT BE ALLOWED AN INCREASE IN COMPENSATION SINCE MATTERS OF POSITION CLASSIFICATION AND PROMOTIONS ARE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE EMPLOYING AGENCY AND CSC. HOFFORD: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF MARCH 5 AND 10. C. AS A RESULT OF A REORGANIZATION IN YOUR AGENCY A NEW SUPERVISORY POSITION WAS CREATED WHICH APPARENTLY INCLUDED SOME OF THE DUTIES OF POSITIONS SIMILAR TO YOURS. THIS POSITION WAS GRADED AS A GS-14 AND THEREAFTER ADVERTISED AS A VACANCY. THE GS-14 POSITION WAS FILLED BY PROMOTION FROM WITHIN YOUR BRANCH AND THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE PERSON SO PROMOTED WAS SENIOR TO YOU IN GRADE.

B-169416, AUG. 12, 1970

EMPLOYEE -- JOB RECLASSIFICATION -- COMPENSATION SUSTAINING SETTLEMENT BY THE CLAIMS DIVISION ON 6 FEBRUARY 1970 THAT DISALLOWED AN EMPLOYEE'S CLAIM FOR AN INCREASE OF COMPENSATION ON BASIS OF AN ALLEGED RECLASSIFICATION OF GS-12 POSITION AS CHEMICAL ENGINEER, WITH THE BUREAU OF NAVAL WEAPONS, DEPT. OF NAVY. EMPLOYEE WHO COMPLAINS THAT HIS POSITION AS GS-12 CHEMICAL ENGINEER WAS IN EFFECT REDUCED WHEN UNDER A REORGANIZATION A NEW SUPERVISORY GS 14 WAS ESTABLISHED, BUT ON APPEAL TO CSC THE COMPLAINT WAS DENIED MAY NOT BE ALLOWED AN INCREASE IN COMPENSATION SINCE MATTERS OF POSITION CLASSIFICATION AND PROMOTIONS ARE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE EMPLOYING AGENCY AND CSC, THEREFORE CLAIM MUST BE DENIED.

TO MR. HENRY H. HOFFORD:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF MARCH 5 AND 10, 1970, REQUESTING REVIEW OF THE SETTLEMENT BY OUR CLAIMS DIVISION OF FEBRUARY 6, 1970, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR AN INCREASE OF PAY AND OTHER BENEFITS RESULTING FROM AN ALLEGED RECLASSIFICATION OF YOUR GS-12 POSITION AS CHEMICAL ENGINEER WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, BUREAU OF NAVAL WEAPONS, WASHINGTON, D. C.

AS A RESULT OF A REORGANIZATION IN YOUR AGENCY A NEW SUPERVISORY POSITION WAS CREATED WHICH APPARENTLY INCLUDED SOME OF THE DUTIES OF POSITIONS SIMILAR TO YOURS. THIS POSITION WAS GRADED AS A GS-14 AND THEREAFTER ADVERTISED AS A VACANCY. THE GS-14 POSITION WAS FILLED BY PROMOTION FROM WITHIN YOUR BRANCH AND THE RECORD SHOWS THAT THE PERSON SO PROMOTED WAS SENIOR TO YOU IN GRADE. IN JANUARY 1963 YOU LEARNED THAT THE VACANCY HAD BEEN FILLED AND MADE A COMPLAINT ABOUT THE PROMOTION OF A PERSON OTHER THAN YOU. THEREAFTER YOU TOOK YOUR COMPLAINT TO THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION ON THE GROUND THAT THE REORGANIZATION OF YOUR BRANCH RESULTED IN A DEMOTION FOR YOU WHICH VIOLATED SECTION 14 OF THE VETERANS PREFERENCE ACT OF 1944. THE APPEALS EXAMINING OFFICER FOUND THAT A REDUCTION IN RANK IN YOUR CASE WAS NOT ESTABLISHED. ON APPEAL TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS AND REVIEW OF THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION THE RULING OF THE EXAMINING OFFICER WAS AFFIRMED. BY A COMPARISON OF YOUR POSITION DESCRIPTION AND THE GS-14 POSITION DESCRIPTION, THE BOARD FOUND A SUBSTANTIAL DIFFERENCE IN THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES WHICH PRECLUDES ANY POSSIBILITY THAT THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE GS-14 POSITION COULD HAVE RESULTED FROM RECLASSIFICATION OF YOUR POSITION.

YOU HAVE REQUESTED OUR OFFICE TO FIND THAT YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE COMPENSATION OF THE GS-14 POSITION. ALTHOUGH WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ALLOWANCE OF THE LAWFUL SALARY RATE CORRESPONDING TO THE GRADE IN WHICH AN EMPLOYEE'S POSITION IS PLACED, WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY HELD THAT MATTERS CONCERNING POSITION CLASSIFICATION AND PROMOTIONS ARE PRIMARILY A RESPONSIBILITY OF THE EMPLOYING DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY WHICH, OF COURSE, IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION. SEE B 155882, JANUARY 12, 1965.

MOREOVER, WE POINT OUT THAT EVEN WHERE AN UPWARD RECLASSIFICATION MAY BE INVOLVED WE HAVE HELD THAT THE INCUMBENT OF SUCH A POSITION IS NOT AUTOMATICALLY ENTITLED TO THE SALARY OF THE HIGHER GRADE. RATHER, ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION IS REQUIRED TO APPOINT AN INDIVIDUAL TO THE POSITION AS RECONSTITUTED.

FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS OUR SETTLEMENT OF FEBRUARY 6, 1970, IS HEREBY SUSTAINED.