Click here to skip navigation
This website uses features which update page content based on user actions. If you are using assistive technology to view web content, please ensure your settings allow for the page content to update after initial load (this is sometimes called "forms mode"). Additionally, if you are using assistive technology and would like to be notified of items via alert boxes, please follow this link to enable alert boxes for your session profile.
An official website of the United States Government.
Skip Navigation

In This Section

Pay & Leave Claim Decisions

You have reached a collection of archived material.

The content available is no longer being updated and as a result you may encounter hyperlinks which no longer function. You should also bear in mind that this content may contain text and references which are no longer applicable as a result of changes in law, regulation and/or administration.

Office of the General Counsel

Date: December 29, 1999
Matter of: [xxx]
File Number: S004004

OPM Contact: Murray M. Meeker

The claimant, a civilian employee at the [agency] states that he has been denied "equity" relating to pay retention. While the claimant apparently accepts the fact that he is not legally entitled to pay retention as a result of his voluntary acceptance of a change to a lower grade, he believes that he should receive retained pay for equitable reasons, including his having made a critical career decision based on misinformation which he received concerning his entitlement to pay retention. For the reasons discussed herein, the claim is denied.

The claims jurisdiction of this office is limited to consideration of legal liability, the Office of Personnel Management has no authority to authorize payment based solely on equitable considerations. 63 Comp. Gen. 50 (1983). Detrimental reliance is not a legal basis for the payment of appropriated funds. 56 Comp. Gen. 943 (1977). It is also well established that a claim may not be granted based on misinformation that may have been provided by federal employees. See Richmond v. OPM, 496 U.S. 414, 425-426 (1990); Falso v. OPM, 116 F.3d 459 (Fed. Cir. 1997); and 60 Comp. Gen. 417 (1981).

This settlement is final. No further administrative review is available within OPM. Nothing in this settlement limits the employee's right to bring an action in an appropriate United States Court.

Control Panel