The Federal Government will Become America's Model Employer for the 21st Century.
Recruit, Retain and Honor a World-Class Workforce to Serve the American People.
Human Resources and Security Specialists should use this tool to determine the correct investigation level for any covered position within the U.S. Federal Government.
OPM’s Human Resources Solutions organization can help your agency answer this critically important question.
Developing senior leaders in the U.S. Government through Leadership for a Democratic Society, Custom Programs and Interagency Courses.
Visit this federal site to search for our regulatory notices, proposed and final rules.
See the latest tweets on our Twitter feed, like our Facebook pages, watch our YouTube videos, and page through our Flickr photos.
The content available is no longer being updated and as a result you may encounter hyperlinks which no longer function. You should also bear in mind that this content may contain text and references which are no longer applicable as a result of changes in law, regulation and/or administration.
OPM Contact: Paul Britner
An agency proposed to remove an employee for refusing to
transfer with his position to another duty station. Before the
effective date of that action, though, the employee accepted a
discontinued service retirement and resigned. Subsequently, after a
break in service of about one month, the agency offered the
employee another position at a lower grade and promised the
employee that he could retain the pay of his former position. After
the claimant started in the new position, the agency determined
that he was not eligible for retained pay because of the break in
The applicable regulation states that an employee is not
eligible for retained pay if there is a break in service of one day
or more "after the employee had received written notification that
his or her pay is to be reduced". The claimant alleges that his
break in service should not disqualify him from receiving retained
pay because the written notice of his job offer did not state that
his pay was to be reduced. The agency states that the proposed
notice of removal satisfied the written notice requirement.
The agency is correct. Because the claimant's break in service
followed the proposed notice of removal, he no longer was eligible
for retained pay. The agency's subsequent offer of a position with
retained pay was based on an erroneous understanding of the law.
Such an error, however, may not create an entitlement to pay that
otherwise is contrary to law.
Accordingly, the claim is denied.