Opinion ID: 479022
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Appeal of the Within-Grade Salary Increase Denial.

Text: 7 On August 22, 1985, Espenschied filed a timely appeal of the WGI denial to the board. The agency responded, discovery proceeded, and a hearing was scheduled. 8 Not until November 15, 1985, at a pre-hearing conference, did the agency question whether the board had jurisdiction. The agency cited as the basis for its concern National Treasury Employees Union v. Cornelius, 617 F.Supp. 365 (D.D.C.1985), a July 1985 decision in which the United States District Court for the District of Columbia held that, where a negotiated grievance procedure covering WGI denials was available, MSPB review was not. The court declared invalid an Office of Personnel Management (OPM) regulation providing MSPB appeal rights from all WGI denials, whether covered under negotiated grievance procedures or not. OPM revoked its previous rulemaking and published regulations conforming to the court's order in a Federal Register notice dated October 31, 1985. The agency also cited Moreno v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 728 F.2d 499 (Fed.Cir.1984), in which this court held that the board lacked jurisdiction to review a WGI denial where a collective bargaining agreement by its terms made a grievance procedure the sole avenue of review. 9 The presiding official issued a decision dismissing Espenschied's WGI appeal on November 21, 1985. That decision stated, The Board's regulations provide that, except for certain actions not pertinent here, employees may not appeal a matter covered by a collective bargaining agreement. 5 C.F.R. Sec. 1201.3(b). The decision then examined the collective bargaining agreement between Espenschied's union and the agency, and concluded that WGI denials were covered under its negotiated grievance procedure. 10