Washington, DC
U.S. Office of Personnel Management
Compensation Claim Decision
Under section 3702 of title 31, United States Code
Pearl Harbor Naval Base
Honolulu, Hawaii
Damon B. Ford
Compensation and Leave Claims
Program Manager
Agency Compliance and Evaluation
Merit System Accountability and Compliance
09/18/2018
Date
The claimant is a Federal civilian employee of the U.S. Department of the Navy in Honolulu, Hawaii. He seeks “back pay and service credit for two-year detail to Supervisory Quality Assurance Specialist Branch Head, GS-13” from October 2010 to October 2012. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) received the claim on January 24, 2018. For the reasons discussed herein, the claim is denied.
From October 2010 through October 2012, the claimant served on a two-year detail at the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard & Intermediate Maintenance Facility. He asserts that during this period he performed higher-graded duties normally assigned to a higher level GS-13, Supervisory Quality Assurance Specialist Branch Head. Specifically, he asserts he was responsible for planning, evaluating, analyzing, executing, directing, implementing, and maintaining an effective audit and assessment program for the Lifting and Handling Department. He further asserts that while assigned to this detail, he repeatedly requested to be paid at the GS-13 rate. On April 2, 2014, the claimant formally requested that he receive back pay and service credit for the time he served on detail. On September 10, 2014, the agency denied the claimant’s requests. The claimant now seeks corrective action from OPM in the form of issuing an OPM Standard Form 52 documenting the two-year detail at the GS-13 level and “back pay totaling approximately $21,000 [the difference between GS-13/4 pay minus WS-11 pay], with credit into his retirement system.”
The agency acknowledges that in April 2014, it prepared a classification advisory with respect to the claimant’s duties performed during the detail. It asserts that the advisory was prepared based solely on information provided by the claimant. In that advisory the agency determined that during the detail the claimant performed the duties of a Supervisory Quality Assurance Specialist, GS-12. However, the agency determined that the claimant is still not entitled to any back pay or service credit.
Although the claimant asserts he was performing the higher-graded duties of a GS-13, a Federal employee is not entitled to back pay for periods of misclassification. The U.S. Comptroller General states: “this rule was reaffirmed by the United States Supreme Court in United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392 at 406 (1976), where the Court stated that “…the federal employee is entitled to receive only the salary of the position to which he was appointed, even though he may have performed the duties of another position or claim that he should have been placed in a higher grade.” See also Wilson v. United States 229 Ct. Cl. 510 (1981). Consequently, back pay is not available as a remedy for misassignments to higher level duties or improper classifications, Regina Taylor, B-192366, Oct. 4. 1978. (CG decision B-232695, December 15, 1989).
Accordingly, the claims for back pay and service credit are denied.
This settlement is final. No further administrative review is available within OPM. Nothing in this settlement limits the claimant’s right to bring an action in an appropriate United States court.