United States
Office of Personnel Management

Office of Merit Systems Oversight and Effectiveness
Digest of Significant Classification Decisions and Opinions


December 2002
Article No. 29-08

Standard:	General Schedule Supervisory Guide (June 1998) [PDF][TXT]

Factor:	N/A

Issue:		Coverage under the General Schedule Supervisory Guide (GSSG)




Identification of the Classification Issue

The appellant’s position was classified as Regional Support Group (RSG) Commander, GS30114, in a military reserve organization.  He managed support, plans and programs, and health services squadrons consisting of air reserve and active guard technicians, and civilian employees.  His job required membership in the military reserve.  The appellant claimed that he supervised GS-13 level employees at separate geographic locations.  Thus he believed the agency should have increased the base level of work directed by his position.
Resolution

The appellant’s position description stated that the appellant planned and coordinated specific functions needed to manage the support of the command and the RSG.  It also stated that this support complemented command direction over assigned geographically separated units.  The appellant had oversight responsibilities for all these units and personally, or through division personnel, reviewed their recruiting and training operations and their ability to go to war.

For active guard technicians in flight test groups (and other staff in geographically dispersed areas), the appellant provided personnel administrative supervision to include such activities as approving travel, performing mid-year reviews, signing ratings, taking disciplinary action, recommending removals, providing officer performance reports to agency headquarters, and advising through periodic visits and weekly telephone discussions.  Different commands outside the line of the appellant's authority provided technical supervision, established the performance standards, evaluated member proficiency, established policy, and had operational control.  As such, the appellant’s supervision over this group did not meet one of the minimum coverage requirements for evaluation under the GSSG, which requires that the position under review accomplish work through combined technical and administrative direction of others.  Therefore, those employees were excluded from consideration under the GSSG.  Upon review, OPM determined that the appellant provided only administrative, rather than technical, supervision over the higher graded employees he claimed to supervise.  OPM advised the agency that it should review the appellant's lines of authority and personnel administrative responsibilities to ensure proper classification under the GSSG.


Digest of Significant Classification Decisions and Opinions, No. 29, December 2002