Washington, DC

U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Job Grading Appeal Decision
Under sections 5103 and 5346(c) of title 5, United States Code

---

Robert D. Hendler
Classification and Pay Claims
Program Manager
Agency Compliance and Evaluation
Merit Systems Accountability and Compliance

04/15/2014

---

Date

As provided in section 511.612 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this pay category decision constitutes a certificate that is mandatory and binding on all administrative, certifying, payroll, disbursing, and accounting officials of the government.  The agency is responsible for reviewing its classification decisions for identical, similar, or related positions to ensure consistency with this decision.  There is no right of further appeal.  This decision is subject to discretionary review only under conditions and time limits specified in the Introduction to the Position Classification Standards (Introduction to the PCS's), appendix 4, section G (address provided in appendix 4, section H).

As provided in section S7-8 of the Operating Manual: Federal Wage System (FWS), this FWS decision constitutes a certificate that is mandatory and binding on all administrative, certifying, payroll, disbursing and accounting officials of the government.  There is no right of further appeal.  This decision is subject to discretionary review only under conditions and time limits specified in 5 CFR 532.705(f).    

Introduction

On November 13, 2012, Chicago Oversight, now Chicago Agency Compliance and Evaluation, of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) accepted a pay category and job grading appeal from Mr. Loren J. Danczyk.  The appellant’s job is presently graded as Electrical Worker Supervisor, WS-2805-9, in the FWS but he believes it should be re-graded as WS-2805-11, or reclassified to the appropriate General Schedule (GS) level.  The job is located in the Electrical Shop in the Maintenance Branch, Facilities Management Department, at the Federal Correctional Institution (FCI) with the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), near Oxford, Wisconsin.  We received the initial AAR on March 25, 2013, and final comments on the AAR from the appellant on July 10, 2013.  We have accepted and decided this appeal under the provisions of sections 5103 and 5346 of title 5, United States Code. 

Background and General Issues

The appellant occupies a standardized job description (JD) (SPD# SPE158), graded on November 7, 2001, as Electrical Worker Supervisor, WS-2805-9.

On August 4, 2010, the appellant requested a desk audit.  In response, the BOP’s Human Resources (HR) Management Division, Classification and Compensation Section, reviewed his job, and in its findings, dated May 6, 2011, determined that the original classification was appropriate.

On May 20, 2011, the appellant filed a pay category and job grading appeal with DOJ requesting that his job classification be changed from pay plan WS to pay plan GS at the GS-11 level.  In its decision, dated December 23, 2011, the HR Office in the Justice Management Division at the DOJ central office determined the appellant’s job was appropriately graded as Electrical Worker Supervisor, WS-2805-9.   The appellant did not file with OPM immediately because he states he was not notified of the Department’s decision until after receiving a response from a congressional inquiry.  Therefore, while the appellant did not file this appeal with OPM within the required 15 days under 5 CFR 532.705(a)(1), we find his appeal timely under 5 CFR 532.705(a)(2) in that he subsequently filed an appeal with OPM within 15 days of being advised the agency decision had been issued.

The appellant’s supervisor certified that the JD is complete and accurate, but the appellant disagrees.  In the appeal rationale, the appellant asserts that his position should either be 1) classified in the General Schedule (GS) because of assistance he provides the contracting officer which was previously performed by an electrical engineer, GS-11 (position now vacant), when he assists the communications technician, or when the engineering technicians are absent, or 2) graded at supervisory grade 10/11 because of the 2805 work he performs which he states must be at or above the journey level in order to effectively train inmate workers.  However, under the FWS, duties performed only in the absence of another employee, to meet emergency workloads, or for training purposes to gain qualifying experience for a higher grade position should not be considered as "regular and recurring" duties when grading mixed jobs (Introduction to the FWS Job Grading System, Section II, C. 3.) and, therefore, cannot control the grade of the job.  Under the GS, duties performed in another employee’s absence cannot be considered in determining the grade of a position (The Classifiers Handbook chapter 5). 

By law, we must classify positions solely by comparing their current duties and responsibilities to OPM standards and guidelines (5 U.S.C. 5103, 5106, 5107, 5112, and 5346).  Other methods or factors of evaluation are not authorized for use in determining the classification of a position, such as previously proposed agency classification actions.  Although the appellant makes various statements about his agency and the evaluation of his job, we have considered these statements only insofar as they are relevant to making that comparison.  Because our decision sets aside any previous agency decision, the appellant’s concerns regarding the classification actions his agency did not take are not germane to the classification appeal process.

The appellate also points to the difference in pay between WS-9 and GS-11 position in the area where he works. However, neither the job grading nor position classification processes provide for comparing GS and FWS pay scales in determining the proper grade of a position.

A JD is the official record of the major duties and responsibilities assigned to a job by an official with the authority to assign work. A job is the duties and responsibilities that make up the work performed by an employee. Pay category and job grading appeal regulations permit OPM to investigate or audit a job and decide an appeal on the basis of the actual duties and responsibilities currently assigned by management and performed by the employee. An OPM appeal decision classifies a real operating job, and not simply the JD. Therefore, this decision is based on the work currently assigned to and performed by the appellant. 

Job information

FCI-Oxford is a medium-security FCI with an adjacent minimum security satellite camp and a detention center.  A medium security institution is for people with criminal histories that are considered too dangerous for federal prison camps, or inmates with sentences that are too long to be granted camp status.  Only inmates assigned to the FCI may apply for a job in the Facilities Management Department.

Federal Prison Industries, Inc. (FPI) is a wholly owned government corporation and inmate reentry program operated within the BOP under the trade name "UNICOR."  FPI's mission is to employ and provide job skills training to the greatest practicable number of inmates confined within the BOP; contribute to the safety and security of federal correctional facilities by keeping inmates constructively occupied; produce market-quality products and services; operate in a self-sustaining manner; and minimize FPI's impact on private business and labor.  The FCI-Oxford also has a UNICOR facility However, that facility is maintained by contractors

The appellant reports directly to the Maintenance Mechanics Supervisor, who in turn reports to the Facility Operations Specialist who runs the Facilities Management Department at FCI-Oxford.  This department administers the ongoing development and maintenance programs for the correctional facility.  The appellant oversees the work of the Electrical Shop and is responsible for work direction and production.   

The primary purpose of the appellant’s job is to supervise and train inmate workers involved in non-supervisory electrical installation, construction, and maintenance work within the FCI.  The appellant develops individual training plans and provides on-the-job training for members of his work team based on their work experience and security designation.  He prepares quarterly and monthly work plans to schedule routine maintenance for the FCI and work camp buildings, as well as special projects needing electrical service.

He prepares weekly and daily work plans to handle scheduled maintenance, work orders (WOs) received daily by email, and minor electrical emergencies.  This includes utilizing two Grade 1 (G-1) workers to serve as work leaders of crews of up to four other inmates who perform maintenance assignments within the FCI, its grounds, and the camp grounds under the direction of a correctional officer (CO) or another supervisor.  The G-1s may also be called out to handle emergency power disruptions when the appellant is not on site.  The rest of the crew must be directly supervised by the appellant who conducts on-the-job training to explain and demonstrate how to perform proper electrical work.  The newest and untrained inmates perform only routine cleaning and sweeping of the shop area.

The appellant may be called upon to perform some electrical work due to security concerns or lack of skilled inmate workers.  He may also be required to handle the more complicated emergencies.  He must possess skill and knowledge in the operation and installation of complete wiring systems found in industrial complexes.  He must also have the ability to interpret and apply National Electrical Codes (NEC), local codes, building plans, blueprints, wiring diagrams, engineering drawings, and trade formulas. 

Inmate worker teams

All federal inmates are required to work with the exception of those who for security, educational, or medical reasons are unable to do so.  An institution work day ordinarily is seven hours.  Most inmates are assigned to an institution job such as food service worker, orderly, plumber, painter, warehouse worker, or groundskeeper, earning 12 cents to 40 cents per hour.  Ninety days after admission, inmates may apply for an industrial assignment to FPI (UNICOR) which is restricted to selling its products and services to Federal government agencies.   Under 28 CFR § 545.23 (a), exceptions are made to allow for inmate participation in an educational, vocational, or drug abuse treatment program, on either a full or part-time basis, where this involvement is mandated by BOP policy or statute.

Work day

A typical day begins with work call at 7:30 AM when the inmate workers are required to report to work.  As a supervisor, the appellant must ensure that all members of the team are present and accounted for.  If someone is missing, the appellant must call the appropriate unit counselor to track him down.  The missing inmate may have received a call out for an appointment or for classroom training.  Or, he may have asked to go to sick bay which begins at 6:30 A.M. when the inmate may proceed to the infirmary when he is not feeling well.

Worksite

The shop area at FCI-Oxford is an open hall.  It is divided into work areas by occupation.  The Electrical Shop is an area approximately 30’ x 25’ with an office at the end.  The inmates congregate in the workspace and receive assignments and training from the appellant.

Crew size and motivation

The appellant is typically assigned 15 inmates, but has had as many as 22 inmates assigned to the Electrical Shop.  The crew size is larger than normal, and even though the appellant maintains a daily work schedule, there is only so much work available, so it is difficult to keep all workers busy and, thus, motivated.  This is particularly true for the least experienced inmates who are limited to performing custodial work in the shop.  The area is constantly monitored by video camera.  The camera targets are shown in the security office TV monitors.  Sometimes the assistant wardens may call the appellant’s office to complain that one of his inmate workers has fallen asleep.  BOP policy authorizes the warden to augment (Augmentation) the security custody roster with non-custody personnel, such as counselors, supervisors, and secretaries to cover during staffing shortages and at times to decrease the amount of overtime worked.  When the appellate is called away for custody duty, he cannot supervise, so the inmates cannot work, which is their only means of earning money for purchasing personal articles in the commissary

Security and custody

The BOP has five security levels.  Federal Prison Camps, the BOP minimum security facilities, have a lack of or a limited amount of perimeter fencing, and a relatively low staff to inmate ratio.  Low security FCIs have double-fenced perimeters, and inmates live in mostly cubicle or dormitory housing.  Medium security FCIs (such as Oxford) and some United States Penitentiaries (such as Marion) are classified to hold medium security inmates. The medium facilities have strengthened perimeters, which often consist of double fences with electronic detection systems.  Medium security facilities mostly have cell housing.  Most U.S. Penitentiaries are classified as high security facilities.  The perimeters, highly secured, often have reinforced fences or walls.  Federal Correctional Complexes are co-locations of BOP facilities with different security levels and/or genders.  FCI-Oxford is a medium-security facility with approximately 1000 inmates (with minimum-security prison camp for another 200).  Although rarer than in high-security federal prisons, serious incidents of violence do occur at medium-security federal facilities such as FCI-Oxford.  For example, on June 21, 2011, a 48-year-old inmate serving a sentence for drug trafficking stabbed another inmate with a homemade prison weapon known as a shank.  Another such incident occurred at FCI Oxford on January 20, 2014. 

Along with all other correctional institution employees, the appellant is charged with responsibility for maintaining security of the institution.  The staff’s correctional responsibilities supersede all others and are performed on a regular and recurring basis.  Specific correctional responsibilities include custody and supervision of inmates, responding to emergencies and institution disturbances, participating in fog and escape patrols, and assuming CO posts when necessary.  The appellant may be required to shakedown inmates and conduct visual searches in their work or living area for contraband.  He must be prepared and trained to use physical control in situations where necessary, such as in fights among inmates, assaults on staff, and riots or escape attempts.

The appellant has the authority to enforce criminal statutes and/or judicial sanctions, including investigative, arrest and/or detention authority.  When necessary, the appellant also has the authority to carry firearms and exercise appropriate force to establish and/or maintain control over individuals.  When conditions warrant, he may be required to enter into hostile or life threatening situations and may be required to make decisions affecting the life, well-being, civil liberties, and/or property of others.  Thus, the position requires proficiency in the use of firearms, self-defense, management of medical emergencies, safety management, and interpersonal communication skills.

Performance pay for inmates

The appellant keeps and maintains a monthly work schedule for routine maintenance of lighting and electrical equipment.  He also administers the performance pay for inmate workers. The appellant must complete a monthly evaluation plan for each inmate to establish pay and hours worked for money to be placed in their commissary account.  Each inmate worker is assigned to an internal BOP pay grade based upon his work experience, security designation, and recent work performance.  The work at each grade is described in a standard statement of the major duties and responsibilities called a job sheet. 

The present pay schedule is as follows:

G-1 = $.40 per hour worked

G-2 = $.29 per hour worked

G-3 = $.17 per hour worked

G-4 = $.12 per hour worked

Ungraded maintenance workers are paid a monthly rate of $5.25.

Except for inmates who do not have any work experience who begin at the ungraded basic work rate for maintenance work, each inmate is assigned to an internal job sheet beginning at G-4 up to G-1. The appellant is limited to only having two G-1s who are considered journey-level electricians.  He may also have five G-3s, four G-2s, and a number of G-4s.

Incentives

The appellant has limited options for motivating inmate employees.  He can put them in a higher pay grade, but difference between assigned job sheets is not much of an incentive.  In addition, the number of inmates at each grade may be limited by budget limitations.

Discipline of inmates

The appellant must document poor performance or intentional incidents (for example, an inmate may intentionally shut off power to disrupt the workplace when only one breaker needs to be deadened for work assignment).  There are a limited number of disciplinary actions the appellant can take, either by taking away pay or work assignments, or assigning an inmate to a lower paid job sheet.

In reaching our decision, we have carefully reviewed all information furnished by the appellant and his agency, including the official JD which, although dated, we find to be sufficient overall for purposes of describing the work performed, and incorporate it by reference into this decision.  In addition, to help decide the appeal we conducted separate telephone interviews with the appellant and his immediate supervisor.

Pay category determination

Section 5102 of 5 U.S.C. requires that a pay category determination be made as the first step in the position classification process.  Section 5102(c)(7) exempts from the GS, employees in recognized trades or crafts, or other skilled mechanical crafts, or unskilled, semiskilled, or skilled manual-labor occupations, and other employees in positions having trade, craft, or laboring experience and knowledge as the paramount requirement.  The Introduction to the PCSs defines "paramount requirement" as the essential, prerequisite knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to perform the primary duty or responsibility for which the position has been established.  Whether a position is in a trade, craft, or manual labor occupation depends primarily on the duties, responsibilities, and qualification requirements; i.e., the most important, or chief, requirement for the performance of a primary duty or responsibility for which the position exists.  If a position clearly requires trade, craft, or laboring experience and knowledge to perform its primary duty, the position is under the FWS.  The paramount determination does not rely on percentages of work time.

The appellant believes his personally performed duties include a variety of GS work, such as assisting the on-site Electronics Technician, GS-856-11, and Engineering Technician, GS-802-11, and by reviewing contracts in place of the former Electrical Engineer (the position is now vacant) who used to do the electrical contract reviews.  The record shows he occasionally acts as a Contracting Officer's Technical Representative for the Contracting Officer (GS-1102-11), to review schematics to see if proposed contract work meets electrical codes.  He has also occasionally been asked to contact local private contractors to determine who should be contacted for maintenance contracts, and is called upon to provide periodic assistance to the contract specialist and/or engineering technicians in completing electrical projects, installing computer equipment, and meeting environmental management standards in the  Electrical Shop. 

The appellant also mentioned the role he played in overseeing and evaluating a High Mast Lighting project valued at approximately $600,000.00.  He says he was tasked to oversee the contractor's electrical installation of the project, and was tasked to create a punch list before final payment was made.  However, the record shows he was asked to do this because the Contracting Officer did not have the trade knowledge of the NEC and electrical construction practices required to make sure that BOP was receiving acceptable work.  In this example, the Contracting Officer is not asking for oversight as suggested by the appellant, he is simply doing what a member of the staff does with contracts; he is asking the appellant, whose work requires in-depth knowledge of the NEC, to verify the facts listed in blueprints and/or contracts so the Contracting Officer can evaluate contract price proposals and the administration or termination and close out of contracts. 

FWS employees routinely "assist" GS technicians and professional engineers, providing input on such issues as project feasibility, choice of materials, etc., from a practical trade’s perspective.  (See, e.g., Introduction to the Electronic Equipment Installation and Maintenance Family, 2600 Job Grading Standard (JGS)).  We find that none of the specific work examples the appellant provides illustrate significant use of specialized, complicated techniques such as technicians would employ in assessing unusual equipment, applications, or devices.  None of them reflect the analysis of considerable and conflicting technical data as required as part of a computer, telecommunications, or engineering study; i.e., they are not performed as integral parts of any engineering studies typical of GS work.  Instead they reflect work readily associated with the operation, maintenance, and repair functions that the FWS encompasses. 

In conclusion, the record shows the appellant serves on a substantially full time and continuing basis as a supervisor over approximately fifteen inmate workers and the work flows from the mission and function assigned to his organization, the Electrical Shop.  This work requires trade knowledge of electrical circuits and system repair.  The troubleshooting techniques he uses depend on the type of maintenance and the depth of repairs needed.  They reflect the primary and paramount trades nature of his work.  The primary purpose of his job is to supervise and train inmate workers involved in non-supervisory electrical installation, construction, and maintenance work.  Since we only apply the standards applicable to the primary and paramount work the employee performs, it is neither necessary nor appropriate to evaluate the temporary work or assistance provided, such as the communications work for an electrical worker who assists a communications technician by running line to a computer terminal.  We find the appellant's work is trade in nature.  Therefore, the appellant's job is properly allocated to the FWS.

Occupational code, title, and standard determination

The agency allocated the appellant’s job as Electrical Worker Supervisor, WS-2805-9, and graded it using the FWS JGS for Supervisors.  However, the appellant disagrees, stating he personally performs higher-graded electrical work and that his JD does not credit him with the knowledge of a journeyman electrician that his supervisory work requires him to have.  The appellant also asserts that his JD is inaccurate since it does not include statements reflecting his work with high-voltage systems, or his responsibility at times for the supervision of inmate workers of other wage supervisors. 

The JGS for Supervisors provides instructions for grading mixed supervisory-nonsupervisory jobs.  These jobs are evaluated by first grading the supervisory and nonsupervisory work separately.  The final grade is then determined by selecting the supervisory or the nonsupervisory grade which results in the highest pay rate for the job.  Since the primary purpose of the appellant’s job is to supervise inmate workers in the Electrical Shop, we determined the proper title, pay system, and occupational code should be Electrical Worker Supervisor, WS-2805.

Grade determination

When both supervisory and nonsupervisory work are a regular and recurring part of the job, the final grade of the job is the supervisory or nonsupervisory grade that results in the higher pay rate for the job.  The JGS states that where the nonsupervisory work personally done by a supervisor is at a higher grade than the work done by the employees supervised, that the nonsupervisory work and the personally performed work are graded separately against the appropriate JGSs.  The final grade of such a job is then determined by selecting the regular nonsupervisory grade or the supervisory grade which results in the highest pay rate for the employee.  Accordingly, we will first examine the appellant's personally performed work and then his supervisory duties for comparison.

Personally Performed Work

After a thorough review of the record, we determined that the appellant personally performs nonsupervisory work which at best would be evaluated at grades up to and including grade 10 in comparison to the 2805 JGS for Electrician and a minor amount of work which would be evaluated at grades up to and including grade10 in comparison to the 2810 JGS for Electrician (High Voltage).  Further, none of his work meets grade 11 described in the 2805 JGS because work at that grade involves nonstandard industrial work or research and development applications which the appellant does not perform.

Supervisory duties and responsibilities

Jobs responsible for the technical and administrative supervision of subordinates in trades and labor work are graded by the JGS for Supervisors when such responsibility is a regular and recurring part of the job and exercised on a substantially full-time and continuing basis.  The grading plan for the JGS for Supervisors uses three factors:  Nature of supervisory responsibility, Level of work supervised, and Scope of work operations supervised.  Although he requested grading as a WS-11, the appellant provided no rationale regarding application of the JGS for Supervisors.

Factor I, Nature of supervisory responsibility

This factor considers the nature of the supervisory duties performed, and the type and degree of responsibility for control over the work supervised.  The factor describes four basic supervisory situations.  These, in sequence, depict successively higher levels of supervisory responsibility and authority for scheduling work operations, planning use of resources (i.e., subordinate workers, equipment, facilities, materials, and tools) to accomplish scheduled or unscheduled work, directing subordinates in performing work assignments, and carrying out administrative duties.  In order for a job to be credited at a level, the job must fully meet the situation.  This means that a job must meet all of the bullets under the specific situation.  The agency credited Situation #2 for this factor.

In Situation #2, supervisors are responsible for supervising workers directly or through subordinate leaders and/or supervisors in accomplishing the work of an organizational segment or group.  Supervisors in Situation #2 differ from supervisors in Situation #1 primarily in planning work operations of greater scope and complexity; determining the sequence, priority, and time for the performance of particular operations within the limits of broader work schedules and time limits; and exercising greater administrative authority.  In addition to the duties described in Situation #1 in the Guide, supervisors in Situation #2 perform the following:

Planning

• Plan use of subordinate workers, equipment, facilities, and materials on a week-to-week or month-to-month basis;
• Establish deadlines, priorities, and work sequences, and plan work assignments based on general work schedules, methods, and policies set by higher level supervisors;
• Coordinate work with supporting or related work functions controlled by other supervisors;
• Determine the number and types of workers needed to accomplish specific projects;
• Redirect individual workers and resources to accomplish unanticipated work, e.g., work resulting from open and inspect types of work orders;
• Inform higher level supervisors of the need to revise work schedules and re-estimate labor and other resources; and
• Participate with their superiors in the initial planning of current and future work schedules, budget requests, staffing needs, estimates, and recommendations as to scheduling projected work.

Work Direction

• Investigate work related problems such as excessive costs or low productivity and determince causes;

• Implement corrective actions within their authority to resolve work problems; and
• Recommend solutions to staffing problems, engineering requirements, and work operations directed by other supervisors.

Administration

•   Plan and establish overall leave schedule;
•   Determine training needs of subordinates and arrange for its accomplishment, set performance standards, and make formal appraisals of subordinate work performance; and
•   Initiate recommendations for promotion or reassignment of subordinates.

Planning:  The appellant consults with his supervisor in planning ongoing assignments and projects.  He organizes and schedules work in consideration of scheduled maintenance plans, WOs, and project work on a weekly and monthly basis.  Projects requiring other trades such as carpentry, plumbing, painting, etc. are coordinated through appropriate supervisors to efficiently accomplish work.  He determines work priorities, number of inmates required, and the equipment needed.  The appellant determines what materials are on hand and orders any other materials and equipment necessary to complete projects.  He assigns inmates to meet scheduled assignments and workload.

Work Direction: The appellant ensures that each project is completed within established deadlines and estimated costs.  If assigned tasks exceed estimates, he determines causes.  He reassigns work crews and job sequences when problems have been identified.  His supervisor is available for unusual situations.

Administration: The appellant develops and maintains a work schedule for assigned inmates.  He approves absences for sick call, family visits, and program or classroom training.  He reviews the inmates’ folders to check on pertinent work experience to determine what training is necessary to become useful and productive members of the work team.  He regularly interprets and explains institution and departmental rules and regulations to new inmates assigned and counsels them regarding their adjustment to prison life.  Inmates are often unwilling to perform work or will intentionally sabotage work in order to cause disruption in the facility.  The appellant counsels and motivates poor performers.  He must be constantly vigilant and alert to potential hazards from dangerous inmates.

Situation #2 is met.  The appellant is a first line supervisor who has responsibility for the overall direction and coordination of subordinate work activities and functions as described in this situation.  The appellant’s work operations have the scope, volume, and complexity requiring planning work operations; determining the sequence, priority, and time for the performance of particular operations within the limits of broader work schedules and time limits found in Situation #2.  Work is sufficiently complex to require using G-1 workers to serve as work leaders over small crews.  In cooperation with the Facilities Department chief, he prepares a quarterly maintenance plan for the Electrical Shop.  He prepares and directs a monthly work plan, coordinates work projects with other group supervisors, administers the performance pay system for inmate workers, develops individual training plans, and provides on-the-job training for members of his work team.  He must track each inmate team member’s work hours during the work day.  When an inmate fails to appear for scheduled work, he must contact the appropriate unit counselor to find out where he is.  While the appellant does not have the same administrative responsibilities as supervisors of regular Federal employees as described at Situation #2, this lack is more than offset by his significant role in training, counseling, motivating, and maintaining discipline and security in relation to the inmate workforce.  In particular, the counseling and motivating of inmates are essential to the effective handling of the special work situation.

In Situation #3, supervisors are responsible for the overall direction and coordination of subordinate work activities and functions.  Supervisors in Situation #3 differ from supervisors in Situations #1 and #2 primarily in that the work operations are of such scope, volume, and complexity that they are (1) carried out by subordinate supervisors in two or more separate organizational segments or groups, and (2) controlled through one or more levels of supervision.   

Situation #3 is not met.  The appellant is not responsible for the overall direction and coordination of other subordinate work activities and functions.  Work operations are not required to be carried out by subordinate supervisors in two or more separate organizational segments or groups or controlled through one or more levels of supervision.  Therefore, we credit Factor I with Situation #2. 

Factor II, Level of work supervised

This factor concerns the level and complexity of the work operations supervised, and their effect on the difficulty and responsibility of the supervisor's job.  To determine the level of nonsupervisory work to be credited under this factor, as indicated in steps 1 and 2 below, consider all substantive work, whether under the direct or indirect supervision of the job being graded, for which the supervisor is technically accountable.

Step1. Identify the occupation (or various occupations) directly involved in accomplishing the work assignments and projects which reflect the main purpose or mission of the work operations for which the supervisor is accountable.  The department administers the ongoing development and maintenance programs for the correctional facility.  The appellant oversees the related work of the Electrical Shop.  The record shows the primary purpose of the work performed is electrical installation, construction, repair and maintenance work within FCI-Oxford.  The agency assigned the inmates’ work to the 2805 Electrician JGS.  

Step2. Determine the grade of the highest level nonsupervisory work accomplished by subordinates who, under normal job controls, perform the work of one or more of the occupations identified in step 1 above. In determining the grade level to be credited, care must be used to make certain that the grades of the subordinate jobs really reflect the level and complexity of the work operations supervised and their effect on the difficulty and responsibility of the supervisor's job.   The 2805 JGS uses four factors to determine grade level:  Skill and Knowledge, Responsibility, Physical Effort, and Working Conditions.  The agency credited the electrical work at the grade 8 level.   

Skill and Knowledge  

At the grade 8 level, work involves making repairs that can be accomplished by removing, replacing, tightening, splicing, soldering, and insulating defective wiring, controls, equipment, and fixtures.  Grade 8 electrical workers require knowledge of where fixtures, wiring, and controls, such as light switches, circuit breakers, fuses, relays, and outlets, are installed and how they operate. They must have the ability to read and follow wiring diagrams that specify where wiring, fixtures, and controls are installed or are to be hooked up and show the type of wiring, fittings, and equipment installed or to be used.  Electrical workers must have the skill needed to remove and replace fixtures and controls, and to make repairs such as tightening connections, wrapping exposed wiring with insulating tape, and soldering loose wire leads to contact points.  They must also have the skill needed to rearrange old or install new outlets, relays, switches, and light fixtures in existing systems, and to test circuits to see if they are complete after making repairs or installations.  At this grade, electrical workers must have the skill needed to measure, cut, and bend wire and conduit to specified lengths and angles.  They must have skill in the use of hand tools and portable power tools, such as screwdrivers, pliers, wire cutters, strippers, drills, soldering irons, and manual or power conduit benders and threaders; and a limited variety of test equipment; for example, meggers, test lamps, and ammeters.

In comparison with the grade 8 level, grade 10 work involves installing, modifying, repairing, maintaining, troubleshooting, testing, and loading new and existing electrical lines, circuits, systems, and associated fixtures, controls and equipment.  Grade 10 electricians must have a knowledge of the operation and installation of a variety of complete electrical systems and equipment, such as series, parallel, and compound circuits for single and multiple phase alternating current of varying voltage, amperage, and frequency; wiring systems in industrial complexes and in buildings; and power or regulating and control circuits and distribution panels to industrial machinery, ships' control equipment, computers or laboratory and other electrical equipment.  Because grade 10 electricians plan, lay out, install, modify, troubleshoot, and repair a variety of complete systems as well as any parts of these systems, they must have greater knowledge than grade 8 electrical workers about how various circuits, equipment, and controls operate, fit, and work together.  Grade 10 electricians must have knowledge of the various gauges, sizes, and types of wire, conduit, couplings, fittings, relays, boxes, circuit breakers, and other electrical devices, and the ability to arrange and install them in ways that insure proper and safe operation of electrical systems and equipment.  They must have the ability to interpret and apply the NEC, local codes, building plans, blueprints, wiring diagrams, and engineering drawings, and to use trade formulas to calculate common properties; e.g., voltage, voltage drop and current capability in series and parallel circuits, resistance, inductance, capacitance, power factor, current flow, and temperature, and length in single and multiple raceways, conduits, gutters, and cable trays.  They must have skill in the use of hand tools; power tools, such as cable pullers, hydraulic benders, and pipe threading machines; and a wide variety of test equipment, for example, multimeters, frequency meters, watt meters, power factor meters, vibro-grounds, phase rotation meters, audio tone location equipment, high potential testers, ground fault interrupter testing equipment, recording amp meters, circuit analyzers, circuit breaker testers, resistance bridges, and cathodic protection test sets.

The G-1 inmate workers’ regular and recurring work fully meets the grade 8 level in that they repair electrical systems and perform limited assignments in the installation of electrical systems.  Typical of that level, they apply the level of skill and knowledge needed to follow system diagrams, remove and replace components, and to test the repairs and new construction that they make.  Unlike the grade 10 level, they do not regularly work on all types of systems.  In addition, they do not perform the full range of duties that require the application of grade 10 level skill and knowledge on a regular and recurring basis; i.e., plan, lay out, install, modify, troubleshoot, and repair a variety of complete systems as well as parts of systems.  Almost all work requiring the application of grade 10 level knowledge and skill on the systems maintained by the Electrical Shop is performed by the appellant, not the inmates.  Therefore, this factor is evaluated at the grade 8 level. 

Responsibility  

At the grade 8 level, a higher grade worker or a supervisor plans, lays out, and assigns work orally or through WOs and wiring diagrams.  Grade 8 electrical workers select tools, decide on methods and techniques to use, and carry out the work independently during its progress.  They use materials called for in WOs and schematic drawings, or obtain replacement parts by comparison with samples such as switches and wall outlet fixtures.  They replace worn or bad switches, relays, and outlets by unscrewing or cutting wiring from connections, inserting the replacement, and splicing, tightening, and soldering wiring to connections.  They also install or rearrange light fixtures, switches, and outlets by following schematic drawings that provide the exact work specifications; for example, the location where the electrical wiring is to be hooked into the installed system, the type, size, and measurements of wire, conduit, couplings, and fittings to use, and the type and placement of the electrical device to be installed.  Routine repair and maintenance duties are accomplished independently; if unusual problems arise, or if installation or repair of unfamiliar or complex industrial electrical systems is assigned, a supervisor or higher grade worker provides advice and checks to see that completed work meets requirements.

Unlike grade 8 electrical workers who receive specific instructions, grade 10 electricians work from building plans, wiring diagrams, and engineering drawings.  They are responsible for planning and laying out the routing, placement, and arrangement of industrial or similarly complex systems, circuits, controls, and equipment.  Grade 10 electricians determine installations and repairs including such things as the types, sizes, gauges, and lay out of conduit, wiring, couplings, fittings, relays, controls, and distribution panels, and other electrical devices used in a variety of complete electrical systems and the best methods of installation and repair.  They are responsible for safe and proper operation of systems and equipment, and for compliance with the NEC.  They complete installations, modifications, and repairs, and load and test systems, circuits, equipment, and controls with little or no check during the progress or upon completion of the work.  The supervisor checks overall work to see that it meets accepted trade standards and is completed in a timely manner.

The G-1 inmate workers perform their duties with little or no technical supervision, but are under constant security watch and control, as are all FCI inmates.  Periodically the appellant, as supervisor, will schedule or assign specific projects to one of the G-1 workers.  The inmate workers contact the supervisor when there are schedule problems or personal conflicts.   The level of responsibility exercised by the G-1 workers fully meets the grade 8 criteria.  However, the grade 10 level is not met.  The responsibility level falls short of the grade 10 level because although the inmate workers function with little or no technical supervision, the appellant, as supervisor, sets all job order requirements and inspects their work.  They do not lay out the complex systems described at the grade 10 level.  Because the G-1 inmate workers do not perform the full range of grade 10 electrical work as discussed previously, they do not deal with the variety of issues and do not exercise the greater judgment and independent action on work found at the grade 10 level.  Because their additional responsibility does not so substantially exceed the grade 8 to warrant consideration of an intervening grade, this factor is credited at grade 8. 

Physical Effort and Working Conditions  

These factors are the same at all grade levels.  Because they do not have grade level impact, and the work meets the levels described in the JGS at the grade 8 level, we will credit both factors as being met and will not address them further.  Factor II is credited at grade 8 for the level of work supervised by the appellant.

Factor III, Scope of Work Operations Supervised  

This factor considers the scope of the job’s supervisory responsibility in terms of:  (1) the scope of the assigned work function and organizational authority; (2) the variety of functions the job is required to supervise; and (3) the physical dispersion, work coordination, and location of subordinates.  This factor is divided into three subfactors, which are in turn subdivided into levels with points assigned to each level.  An appropriate level is selected for each subfactor and the corresponding point values are totaled.  The total points are then converted to specific levels under Factor III using the conversion chart at the end of the factor. 

Subfactor A.  Scope of Assigned Work Function and Organizational Authority 

This subfactor measures the scope of the assigned work function or mission; i.e., the purpose of the job in the organization, the extent and nature of the job’s authority in relation to the organizational assignment, and the importance of the job's decisions.  The agency credited Level A-2.

At Level A-1, supervisors have first-level supervisory and decision authority over a single work function.  Decisions made at this level are clearly defined or virtually automatic since higher-level management has already established a course of action and a methodology for implementation.  

At Level A-2, supervisors have first- or second-level supervisory and decision authority over an organizational segment, which typically has been established based on being a distinct work function or mission; or a designated geographic location or work area.  Supervisors make routine decisions regarding execution of policy that has been interpreted or established by the next higher level.  At this level, subordinate supervisors and/or leaders may be necessary to accomplish work operations.  Supervisors at this level react to variations in the workplace and maintain a balanced workload between subordinate work groups, making adjustments in workload as necessary.  Decisions typically involve the work or assignments and how they are completed.  

At Level A-3, supervisors have second level or higher supervisory and decision authority for work functions or a portion of a mission requirement (e.g., a specific program in a designated geographic location or a specific function). The scope of the mission or work functions at this level typically requires supervisors to utilize several subordinate supervisors and leaders through structured working relationships among subordinate groups of employees, formal procedures for scheduling and assigning work and work results, and the issuance of instructions through subordinate supervisors and leaders. At this level, supervisors make interpretive decisions within the program limits established at higher levels.  

Level A-2 is met.  The Electrical Shop is listed as a separate organizational level on the Facility Management Department organizational chart with the appellant shown as supervisor (Electrical Worker Supervisor).  The appellant exercises first level decision authority over a unit comprised of 15 to 22 inmates.  There are usually two "lead" inmates designated to guide and train newly assigned or less experienced inmates.  Decisions at the appellant’s level typically relate to day-to-day WO issues, establishing plans to accomplish recurring/cyclical maintenance, reviews and repairs, and participating in and providing input to larger projects as they relate to his assigned areas of responsibility.  He must reassign inmate workers as assignments or work sequences change, and make adjustments as necessary.  This exceeds level A-1 because the appellant has a greater decision making authority than described at that level.  Level A-3 is not met because the appellant does not direct work through subordinate supervisors or work units.  This subfactor is evaluated at Level A-2 (45 points). 

Subfactor B.  Variety of Function 

This subfactor evaluates the difficulties of technical supervision of work functions that may vary from being essentially similar to markedly dissimilar.  Similar or related work functions have a common or related body of knowledge, skills, work procedures, and tools; e.g., pipefitting and plumbing, carpentry and woodworking, aircraft mechanic and aircraft engine mechanic, or machining and machine tool operating.  Supervision of dissimilar or unrelated work functions requires broader technical knowledge and planning and coordination skills than those required for supervision of similar work functions.  The agency credited Level B-3.    

At Level B-3, supervisors direct the work of subordinates in one or more similar or related occupations at grades 8-13.  At Level B-4, supervisors direct work of subordinates in dissimilar or unrelated occupations at grades 8-13.  The appellant primarily supervises electrical installation and maintenance work at the grade 8 level. Although the requirement exists from time to time to perform other work such as carpentry, masonry, and painting to facilitate electrical work which is the primary purpose of the job, this function represents primarily a single occupation found at the grade 8 level, and therefore, this subfactor is evaluated at Level B-3 (50 points).  

Subfactor C.  Workforce Dispersion 

This subfactor evaluates the varying levels of difficulty associated with monitoring and coordinating the work of nonsupervisory and supervisory personnel who vary from being collocated to widely dispersed.  Dispersion of workforce considers the duration of projects, number of work sites, frequency of dispersion, and the necessity to monitor and coordinate the work.  The agency credited Level C-1.  

At Level C-1, subordinate employees are located in several buildings or at work sites within a defined location such as a military base, National Park, or large Federal complex consisting of many multi-floor buildings and support facilities.  Work assignments vary in terms of duration; however, most assignments at this level are of limited duration; i.e., assignments are typically accomplished within a few days or weeks.  The appellant’s work meets Level C-1.  His inmates are located in three different buildings and they occasionally travel to provide repair services.  As opposed to the supervision of regular employees where dispersion of the workforce is an inherent aspect of providing maintenance and repair services, and where most of the subordinates are long term, fully trained employees who typically accomplish their assignments without the need for supervisory intervention or oversight; most assignments take a few hours to a day to complete; and two way communications are readily available, the work is performed within the confines of a correctional institution where the supervisor must keep close supervision of the inmate workers.

At Level C-2, subordinate employees are located in work groups of varying sizes at numerous job sites within large military bases (e.g., air rework facilities, supply depots, shipyards, and comparable Federal facilities).  Employees or work groups at this level may on occasion work outside of the commuting area or across State lines. Work assignments at this level are typically on an ongoing basis and are accomplished within several weeks or months.  Level C-2 is not met. 

This subfactor is evaluated at Level C-1 (5 points).    

Factor III is credited with a total of 100 points, the sum of the points for the three subfactors, which on the conversion chart equates to Level B.   

Tentative Grade Assignment  

According to the Guide’s Grading Table, the intersection point where Supervisory Situation #2 meets with a grade 8 level of work supervised, coupled with Level B, equates to the grade 8 supervisory level. 

Grade Level Adjustment

Both upward and downward changes from the tentative grade are required based on certain circumstances.  A situation requiring a downward adjustment is offset by an upward adjustment.  Grade level adjustments may not exceed one grade level. 

Downward  

A downward adjustment is indicated when the tentative grade would be the same grade as the supervisor’s superior.  This situation does not apply to the appellant’s job. 

Upward  

Upward grade adjustments are indicated for borderline jobs and work situations that impose special or unusual demands on the supervisor.    

Borderline Jobs 

An upward adjustment is indicated when the supervisory job substantially exceeds the situation credited under Factor I and the base level of work determined under Factor II is not the highest level of subordinate work for which the supervisor has full technical responsibility.  However, in this case a grade adjustment based on borderline conditions is not warranted.

Special or Unusual Demands

In some situations, special staffing requirements may impose a substantially greater than normal responsibility for job design, job engineering, work scheduling, training, counseling, motivating, and maintaining security.  This may occur under special employment programs and at correctional institutions having exceptionally difficult attitudinal, motivational, control, and security problems.  An upward grade adjustment is indicated when exceptional conditions affect the majority of the subordinate workforce and (1) are permanent and continuing, require the tailoring of assignments, tasks, training, security, and other supervisory actions to individuals, and (2) require regular and recurring counseling and motivational activities.  The record shows these conditions are clearly present in the appellant’s job and are evaluated in the next section.   

Supervisory jobs with correctional responsibilities  

Because of the great variety of federal work operations and missions, considerable care is needed in applying this situation in the JGS.  One of the most complex situations demanding such care is that in which worker-inmates are supervised in accomplishing trades and labor work at correctional facilities.  Because of differences among such facilities, particularly with respect to the nature and needs of the worker-inmate populations and security considerations involved, there may be significant differences in the purpose and nature of the "supervision" exercised.  An upward grade adjustment may be made in determining the grade of a supervisor directly responsible or indirectly responsible (through subordinate supervisors) for work operations involving such exceptional conditions that affect the majority of the subordinate workforce when all of the following are present:

•    The special staffing circumstances, rather than being temporary or intermittent in duration, affect the responsibilities of the supervisor on a permanent and continuing basis;

•   Job assignments, work tasks, training, security measures, and other supervisory actions must be tailored to fit these special circumstances for individual workers; and

•    Counseling and motivational activities are regular and recurring, and are essential to the effective handling of the special work situation.

Based on a careful review of the record, in particular to the exceptional supervisory demands reflected in the job information section, we find this position meets the criteria for an upward grade adjustment.  Specific job assignments and training are carefully designed to consider the skill levels and particular circumstances of individual workers, based on a thorough review of the case folders by the appellant at the time of an inmate’s admission.  The appellant must regularly counsel and motivate workers with the goal of assisting rehabilitation and providing job skills.  Although supervisors in such correctional center work settings usually do not have the same administrative responsibilities as supervisors of regular federal employees, in this instance, the actual supervision required is actually much more intense than usual due to the special and unusual demands of providing appropriate work for inmates.  The appellant plays a significant role in training, counseling, motivating, and maintaining discipline and security.  The work is further complicated by requirements to control the movement of inmates, the use of certain tools, as well as all of the other considerations to ensure the security of the facility and safety of other inmates and staff. 

An upward adjustment from the tentative grade 8 supervisory level to the grade 9 supervisory level is indicated. 

Summary

As discussed previously, the JGS for Supervisors provides instructions for grading mixed supervisory-nonsupervisory jobs.  These jobs are evaluated by first grading the supervisory and nonsupervisory work separately.  The final grade is then determined by selecting the supervisory or the nonsupervisory grade which results in the highest pay rate for the job.  This is done by comparing the representative rates of the supervisory and nonsupervisory work.  Section 532.401 of title 5, CFR, defines the representative rate as the going rate or step keyed to prevailing rate determinations.  For FWS positions such as this one, it is the second rate on a five-rate regular wage schedule.  Therefore, according to the 2014 FWS wage rate schedule for the appellant’s wage area of Oxford, Wisconsin (RUS), the representative rate for WS-9, step 2 ($29.21 per hour), is more than the representative rate for the WG-10, step 2, ($22.95 per hour) nonsupervisory grade in the FWS and, therefore, exceeds the highest representative rate for the appellant's nonsupervisory work.

Decision  

The appellant’s job is properly graded as Electrical Worker Supervisor, WS-2805-9. 

Back to Top