Bielec v. United States
| Decision Date | 17 March 1972 |
| Docket Number | 111-67,113-67,112-67,No. 110-67,114-67,115-67 and 116-67.,110-67 |
| Citation | Bielec v. United States, 456 F.2d 690, 197 Ct.Cl. 550 (Fed. Cl. 1972) |
| Parties | William F. BIELEC v. The UNITED STATES. John H. BLISARD v. The UNITED STATES. Seldon VAN BUSKIRK v. The UNITED STATES. Herbert MUKHALIAN v. The UNITED STATES. Albert SCHOOLEY v. The UNITED STATES. James A. SITLEY v. The UNITED STATES. Phillip STEINMAN v. The UNITED STATES. |
| Court | U.S. Claims Court |
John Edward Sheridan, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs; Byron N. Scott, Washington, D. C., atty. of record. Van A. Stilley, Washington, D. C., of counsel.
Judith A. Yannello, Washington, D. C., with whom was Asst. Atty. Gen. L. Patrick Gray, III, for defendant.
Before COWEN, Chief Judge, LARAMORE, Senior Judge, and DAVIS, COLLINS, SKELTON, NICHOLS and KASHIWA, Judges.
ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DEFENDANT'S CROSS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
The plaintiffs, William F. Bielec, John H. Blisard, Seldon Van Buskirk, Herbert Mukhalian, Albert Schooley, James A. Sitley, and Phillip Steinman, filed separate suits against the United States, which were consolidated for trial because all of them involved the same issues. The facts are stipulated by the parties.
The plaintiffs are all career civil service employees in the Department of Defense. They claim entitlement to promotions to higher grades and ranks in the service by reason of an alleged upgrading of positions they were temporarily occupying without a corresponding promotion of the plaintiffs to higher grades. They claim that such promotions are mandatory under the law. We have concluded that the plaintiffs are not entitled to recover.
The facts on which the plaintiffs base their claims are generally as follows.
On October 11, 1963, the Department of Defense directed a Pilot Test for the Defense Contract Administration Services Region (DCASR) and on November 30, 1963, designated Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the Pilot Test. On February 28, 1964, authorities were delegated and functional responsibilities were assigned to DCASR pilot test and DCASR became operative on April 20, 1964. Plaintiffs were detailed effective April 20, 1964, for a period not to exceed October 20, 1964, from the various military departments to DCASR, with duties commensurate with their former positions, as follows:
TABLE I
____________________________________________________________________________
| |
Name | Former Regular Position | DCASR Detail Position
____________|___________________________________|___________________________
| |
Bielec _____| GS-1104-11, Chief, Property | GS-1104-11, Property
| Disposal Function, | Disposal Office served as
| Administrative Services Office. | Chief, Plant Clearance
| | Branch Industrial Services
| | Division
| |
Blisard ____| GS-1903-12, Supervisory Quality | GS-1150-13, Supervisory
| Control Specialist. | Quality Control Specialist
| | served as Chief, Control
| | Branch, Quality Assurance
| | Directorate, Planning and
| | Review Division
| |
Van Buskirk | GS-1150-13, Supervisory | GS-1102-13, Supervisory
| Industrial Specialist (General). | Industrial Specialist
| | (General) served as
| | Deputy Director of
| | Production Directorate
| |
Mukhalian __| GS-1102-13, Supervisory Contract | GS-1102-13, Supervisory
| Price Analyst. | Contract Price Analyst
| | acted as Chief
| | Financial Services
| | Division
| |
Schooley ___| GS-1102-12, Supervisory Contract | GS-1102-12, Supervisory
| Price Analyst. | Contract Price Analyst
| | acted as Chief, Price
| | Cost Analysis Branch.
| |
Sitley _____| GS-1102-14, Supervisory Contract | GS-1102-14, Supervisory
| Specialist. | Contract Specialist
| | served as Deputy
| | Executive Director.
| |
Steinman ___| GS-1104-9, Property Disposal | GS-1104-9, Property
| Assistant. | Disposal Assistant
| | served as Plant Clearance
| | Officer for region of
| | Pittsburgh area and
| | Western Pennsylvania.
____________|___________________________________|__________________________
On September 1, 1964, DCASR became a permanent field activity of the Defense Supply Agency. Effective November 1, 1964, plaintiffs were, because of a transfer of their functions, transferred permanently to DCASR.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Local 2855, AFGE (AFL-CIO) v. U.S.
...to transfer operations from one facility to another is committed to agency discretion by 10 U.S.C. § 125); Bielec v. United States, 456 F.2d 690, 695, 197 Ct.Cl. 550 (Ct.Cl.1972) ("Reorganization of government positions is peculiarly within the authority and discretion of agency officials."......
-
Kizas v. Webster
...534 F.2d 232, 234-35 (Ct.Cl.1975).53 See, e.g., Johnston v. United States, 175 F.2d 612, 617-19 (4th Cir.1949); cf. Bielec v. United States, 456 F.2d 690, 696 (Ct.Cl.1972).54 Army & Air Force Exch. Serv. v. Sheehan, supra note 49, 102 S.Ct. at 2124-26 (regulations governing separation proce......
-
Baker v. United States
...43 (1943); Jackson v. United States, 42 Ct.Cl. 39, 41-42 (1906)." 552 F.2d at 924, 212 Ct.Cl. at 98. Accord, Bielec v. United States, 456 F.2d 690, 197 Ct.Cl. 550, 560 (1972); Dianish v. United States, 183 Ct.Cl. 702, 707 Therefore, summarizing the decisions of the Supreme Court and this co......
-
Crowley v. United States, 93-72.
...it plain to all interested parties that it might lead to permanent promotion. As articulated by this court in Bielec v. United States, 456 F.2d 690, 696, 197 Ct.Cl. 550, 560 (1972), which rejected plaintiffs' claims to non-competitive promotions to positions upgraded incident to an agency r......