B-195296, JAN 9, 1980

B-195296, JAN 9, 1980

DIGEST: EMPLOYEE WAS DETAILED FROM CLERK-TYPIST GS-4 TO TRAINING COORDINATOR GS-7 FOR MORE THAN 120 DAYS. SHE IS NOT ENTITLED TO RETROACTIVE TEMPORARY PROMOTION TO THE GS-7 POSITION WITH BACK PAY BECAUSE SHE DID NOT MEET THE TIME-IN-GRADE OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT POSITION. NEITHER IS SHE ENTITLED TO RETROACTIVE TEMPORARY PROMOTION TO TRAINING COORDINATOR GS-5 WITH BACK PAY SINCE SHE DID NOT SATISFY THE MINIMUM CIVIL SERVICE REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE FOR THAT POSITION.

EVELYN M. TAYLOR - CLAIM FOR RETROACTIVE TEMPORARY PROMOTION AND BACK PAY:

EVELYN M. TAYLOR APPEALS OUR CLAIMS DIVISION SETTLEMENT DATED MAY 22, 1977, DENYING HER BACK PAY CLAIM BASED ON TURNER-CALDWELL, 55 COMP.GEN. 539 (1975), AFFIRMED AT 56 ID. 427 (1977). THAT DECISION HOLDS THAT IF AN EMPLOYEE IS DETAILED TO A POSITION CLASSIFIED IN A HIGHER GRADE FOR A PERIOD IN EXCESS OF 120 DAYS WITHOUT CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION (CSC) APPROVAL, HE OR SHE IS ENTITLED TO A RETROACTIVE TEMPORARY PROMOTION AND BACK PAY FOR SUCH PERIOD PROVIDED ALL QUALIFICATIONS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCH A PROMOTION ARE MET. SEE PARAGRAPH 8C, CSC BULLETIN 300-40, MAY 22, 1977.

WHILE EMPLOYED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY AS A CLERK-TYPIST GS 322-4, MS. TAYLOR WAS INFORMALLY DETAILED FROM MAY 8, 1977, TO JUNE 18, 1978, TO A POSITION CLASSIFIED AS TRAINING COORDINATOR GS-301-7. THE ARMY DENIED MS. TAYLOR'S CLAIM FOR RETROACTIVE TEMPORARY PROMOTION TO THE GRADE GS-7 POSITION AND BACK PAY BECAUSE SHE DID NOT SATISFY THE WHITTEN AMENDMENT REQUIREMENT OF ONE YEAR IN GRADE GS-6. MS. TAYLOR THEN FILED A CLAIM WITH OUR CLAIMS DIVISION. THIS WAS RETURNED TO THE ARMY FOR POSSIBLE SETTLEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR DECISIONS WHICH IMPLEMENT TURNER- CALDWELL AND HOLD THAT AN EMPLOYEE WHO HAS BEEN DETAILED FOR MORE THAN 120 DAYS TO A POSITION CLASSIFIED TWO OR MORE GRADES ABOVE HIS OR HER ASSIGNED GRADE IS ENTITLED TO A RETROACTIVE TEMPORARY PROMOTION TO THE HIGHEST INTERVENING GRADE FOR WHICH HE OR SHE MET THE WHITTEN AMENDMENT AND OTHER APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS. SEE SAM FRIEDMAN, EDWIN C. BAKER, AND RUSSELL A. HOLMES, JR., B-189690, FEBRUARY 16, 1978, AND MARY LEE GROOVER, B-190174, APRIL 21, 1978.

THE ARMY AGAIN DENIED MS. TAYLOR'S CLAIM, THIS TIME ON THE GROUND THAT SHE DID NOT HAVE 2 YEARS OF SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE IN THE TRAINING FIELD, WHICH THE ARMY DETERMINED WAS NECESSARY TO QUALIFY FOR THE TRAINING COORDINATOR GS-301-5 POSITION. OUR CLAIMS DIVISION CONCURRED WITH THIS DETERMINATION WHICH WAS BASED ON THE CSC HANDBOOK X-118 QUALIFICATION STANDARDS FOR POSITIONS UNDER THE GENERAL SCHEDULE. THESE STANDARDS REQUIRE FOR A GS-301-5 CLERK POSITION 1 YEAR OF GENERAL EXPERIENCE AND 2 YEARS OF SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE WHICH IS DEFINED AS PROGRESSIVELY RESPONSIBLE EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD IN WHICH THE DUTIES OF THE POSITION ARE TO BE PERFORMED. EXPERIENCE IN RELATED FIELDS MAY BE COUNTED AS SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE FOR A MAXIMUM OF 6 MONTHS. IN ADDITION, STUDY IN A RESIDENT SCHOOL ABOVE THE HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE.

MRS. TAYLOR CONTENDS THE TRAINING COORDINATOR POSITION WAS CLERICAL RATHER THAN TRAINING IN NATURE. IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION SHE HAS SUBMITTED A COPY OF THE POSITION DESCRIPTION AND THE POSITION CLASSIFICATION EVALUATION REPORT AND POINTED OUT THAT THE POSITION WAS CLASSIFIED IN THE GENERAL CLERICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERIES GS-301. SHE FURTHER CONTENDS THAT SHE HAD ACQUIRED THE NECESSARY EXPERIENCE FOR PROMOTION TO A GS-301-5 POSITION THROUGH MORE THAN 9 YEARS OF SERVICE IN VARIOUS CLERK-TYPIST GS-322-4 AND MAIL CLERK GS-305-4 POSITIONS. SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION, SHE HAS SUBMITTED COPIES OF THE DESCRIPTIONS FOR THESE POSITIONS.

HOWEVER, NOTWITHSTANDING MS. TAYLOR'S CONTENTIONS OR THE POSITION CLASSIFICATION EVALUATION REPORT WHICH CONSIDERS AND REJECTS THE EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT SERIES GS-235 AS THE APPROPRIATE SERIES FOR THE TRAINING COORDINATOR POSITION, IT IS OUR VIEW THAT THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES, AS SET FORTH IN THE POSITION DESCRIPTION, INVOLVED RELATIVELY SUBSTANTIVE KNOWLEDGES AND SKILLS IN THE FIELD OF EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT. MOREOVER, WHILE AN EXAMINATION OF THE DESCRIPTIONS OF THE GRADE GS-4 CLERICAL POSITIONS WHICH MS. TAYLOR HELD INDICATES THAT SOME OF THE DUTIES WERE IN SUPPORT OF TRAINING PROGRAMS, THESE WERE NOT, IN OUR VIEW, SUFFICIENTLY SUBSTANTIVE TO QUALIFY AS SPECIALIZED EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT EXPERIENCE. IS WORTH NOTING THAT, HAD THE TRAINING COORDINATOR POSITION BEEN CLASSIFIED IN THE EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT SERIES GS-235, A COLLEGE DEGREE OR EQUIVALENT EXPERIENCE WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED FOR THE GRADE GS-5 LEVEL. SEE CSC HANDBOOK OF OCCUPATIONAL GROUPS AND SERIES OF CLASSES, POSITION CLASSIFICATION STANDARDS, AND HANDBOOK X-118.

BASED ON THE FOREGOING, WE CONCLUDE THAT DURING HER SERVICE IN VARIOUS GRADE GS-4 POSITIONS MS. TAYLOR ACQUIRED THE REQUIRED 1 YEAR GENERAL EXPERIENCE AND, THROUGH EXPERIENCE IN RELATED FIELDS, 6 MONTHS OF SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE FOR THE TRAINING COORDINATOR POSITION. IN ADDITION SHE COULD PROBABLY BE CREDITED WITH APPROXIMATELY 14 MONTHS OF SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE FOR THE PERIOD SHE WAS DETAILED TO THE POSITION. HOWEVER, THIS TOTALS ONLY 20 OF THE REQUIRED 24 MONTHS OF SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE AND THERE IS NO RECORD OF ANY STUDY IN A RESIDENT SCHOOL ABOVE THE HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL WHICH COULD BE SUBSTITUTED FOR SUCH EXPERIENCE. THEREFORE, MS. TAYLOR DID NOT MEET THE QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TRAINING COORDINATOR GS-301-5 POSITION AT ANY TIME DURING HER DETAIL.

ACCORDINGLY, THE SETTLEMENT ACTION OF THE CLAIMS DIVISION DISALLOWING MS. TAYLOR'S CLAIM FOR A RETROACTIVE TEMPORARY PROMOTION AND BACK PAY IS SUSTAINED.