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.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobadhua0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
0 E C1S1IN
FILE:
THU COMPTROLLER GENERAL
OF THE UNITED STATES
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2,0549
. *
qk OLE
DATE:December 10, 1979
B-195656
MATTER
DIGEST:
OF: Roger F. Dierking -Lelaim for Retroactive
Promotion and Backpay7
Employee classified as GS-11 claims retroactive
promotion to GS-12 and backpay on ground that.
agency should have effected proposed reclassifi-
cation actions showing higher grade. Although
requests were made in 1971 and 1975 to reclassify
employee's position as GS-12, employee has no
entitlement to backpay since there is no evidence
that the higher grade was ever established.
Mr. Roger F. Dierking has appealed from a denial by our
Claims Division of his claim for retroactive promotion and
backpay.
- Mr. Dierking's claim was received in this Office on March 1,
1979; therefore, the period prior to March 1, 1973, is precluded
from our consideration as it is time barred. 31 U.S. C. § 71a
(1976).
The record shows that Mr. Dierking was employed by the
Bureau of Land Management, State Office, Portland Oregon. 9 2
He was occupying a position classified as a Supervisory Land
Law Examiner, GS-11. Mr. Dierking says that a job descrip-
tion was prepared by his agency in 1971 and 1975, upgrading
his position to a GS-12. However, neither of the proposed
reclassification actions ever went into effect. . In 1978, a
position classifier determined that his duties were properly
classified at the GS-11 level. This last action has been
appealed by Mr. Dierking and is pending in the Office of Per-
sonnel Management. Mr. Dierking states that [t]he agency 92
was responsible for completing appointment at the GS-12 grade
when duties were so classified and assigned. He also stated
that [n]o authority existed for the agency to continue pay at the
lower GS-11 grade under an outdated position description and
classification action. He therefore claims he has suffered an
unjustified or unwarranted personnel action and is entitled to
backpay under the provisions of the Back Pay Act. 5 U. S. C.
§ 5596 (1976).](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobadhua0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)