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

B-196506 1 (1982-07-08)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadklq0001 and id is 1 raw text is: I 9 .FILEt B-1965Q6 MIATTER OF: DIGEST; DATE; July 8, 1982 International Trade Comission-Legal representation Chairman, international Trade Comission requests de- cision on whether Comission may use appropriated fwis to furnish legal representation to employees brought be- fore Merit Syatems Protection Board on complaint of the Board's Special Counsel. Commission fundo are available to provide counsel in cases in which supervisor performed the conduct which is the subject of the Special Counsell's complaint wJthin tihe scope of employment and the agency determines that it is in its interest to provide repre- sentation. Conduct is within the scope of a supervisor's employment if it is in furtherance of, or incident to Lhe carrying out of official duties. Because such conduct is in furtherance of an agerncy function, the cost of counsel may be considered a necessary expense incurred in perform- ing that function. 53 Comp. Gen. 301 (1973) cited. The Chairman of the International Trade Comission has requested our opinion on whether the Commission may use appropriated funds to provide legal representation for employees brought before the Merit Systems Protection Board by the Special Counsel. We hold that it may. The Merit Systems Protection Board, created by the Civil Service )Reform Act of 1978 (Pub. L. No. 95-454, 92 Stat, 1111 (1978), is charged with insuring adherence to the merit systems principles enunciated by the Act. Among its duties, the Board (or an administrative law judge designated by the Board) conducts hearings to determine whether Federal employees have committed so-called prohibited personnel prac- tices. The practices include discriminating for or against an employee on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, hand- icapping condition, marital status or political affiliatior;l grantirg any unauthorized preference or advancage to any employee for the pur- pose of improving or injuring the prospect of any partiular person for employments taking or failing to take a personnel action with respect to any employee as a reprisal for whistleblowing disclosurest, and taking or failing to take such actions which violate any law, rile or regulation implementing, or directly concerning the merit systems principles of the act. 5 U.S.C. S 2302(b) (Supp. I1. 1979). The Board prepares a written decision at the conclusion of a hearing and may issue a final order imposing disciplinary action. 5 U.S.C. S 1207(a)(5),(b) (Supp. III, 1979). The Board may order an employee's C - a inr-. r I STHU COMPTROLLER CENIERAL. DECISION O. F THE- UN1TErJ S3TATEUs . WASHINGTON, Do 0. 20t1415 . '_._P III cbLf

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