About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-195612 1 (1979-09-21)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadhpx0001 and id is 1 raw text is: DECISION FILE: B-195612 ___/P7/HEPLA. THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, O.C. 20548 DATE: September 21, 1979 MATTER OF: James M. LeVine -LClaim for retroactive compensation DIGEST: Employee whose job was abolished because of a reduction in force and who was placed in a lower grade position claims to have continued to per- form the duties of the former position after he was changed to lower position. Employee is not entitled to retroactive temporary promotion and backpay in absence of evidence that he was detailed to the higher position regardless of the duties performed. The issue presented in this case upon an appeal of our Claims Division's denial of a claim for retroactive promotion and backpay is whether an employee whose job is abolished due to a reduction in force and is placed in a lower grade position is entitled to retro- active .promotion and backpay if he performs any or all of the func- tions or duties of the old position. The answer is no. Mr. James M. LeVine receiveid notice of a reduction in force on May 9, 1972. His position of inspector (heavy duty equipment repair) was abolished and he was placed in the lower grade position of Heavy Mobile Equipment Mechanic effective July 16, 1972. Mr. LeVine contends that he continued to perform the duties of an inspector and foreman and should have been compensated at the WS-10 Transportation Foreman pay scale rather than the Heavy Duty Equipment Mechanic, WG-10 wage scale to which he was assigned from July 16, 1972, through his voluntary retirement effective April 26, 1978. The p C A administrative report supplied by the employing agency, the Naval Postgraduate School, denies Mr. LeVine's assertions about the , duties performed by him after July 16, 1972, and states that another person performed the duties of transportation foreman until his retirement in February 1978. It is a well established rule that an employee is entitled only to the salary of the position to which he is actually appointed, regardless of the duties he performs. Patrick L. Peters, B-189663, November 23, 1977; 55 Comp. Gen. 515 (1975). The proper course of action for an employee to follow in cases of alleged improper position classification is to appeal the

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most