5 C.F.R. § 351.401
Determining retention standing
Each agency shall determine the retention standing of each competing employee on the basis of the factors in this subpart and in subpart E of this part.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases, 1976–2016 · leading case: Raymond E. Dodd v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 770 F.2d 1038 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
Raymond E. Dodd v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 770 F.2d 1038 (Fed. Cir. 1985). “” See 5 C.F.R. § 351.401 . Competitive area, 5 C.”
Palmer v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 550 F.3d 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2008). “See also 60 FR 45650 (renumbering 5 CFR § 351.401 as 5 CFR § 353.304 ). In Booker , a postal employee was injured and received OWCP benefits before returning to limited duty following a partial recovery.”
Daniel R. Krizman v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., & United States Postal Serv., Intervenor, 77 F.3d 434 (Fed. Cir. 1996). “See 5 C.F.R. §§ 351.401 -.807, 351.901. Ordinarily, employees of the Postal Service do not enjoy the protections of the RIF regulations.”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Hoffmann, 427 F. Supp. 1048 (N.D. Ala. 1976). “§ 3502 (a); 5 C.F.R. 351.401. A competing employee is a career, nonprobationary employee in the competitive civil service.”
Wilson v. Cox, 828 F. Supp. 2d 20 (D.D.C. 2011). “Cook, May 11, 2007) at 15; see 5 C.F.R. §§ 351.401 -.405 (providing for retention competition procedures).”
James W. Mayo v. Donald P. Hodel, Sec'y, U.S. Dep't of Energy, 741 F.2d 441 (D.C. Cir. 1984). “5 C.F.R. § 351.401 -.501. Excepted employees, such as the plaintiff, must also be ranked in that fashion.”
Casey D. Weathers v. Dep't of the Navy, 2014 MSPB 57 (MSPB 2014). “5 C.F.R. §§ 351.401 , 351.403(a)(1). Generally, a competitive area “must be defined solely in terms of the agency’s organizational unit(s) and geographical location.”
Casey D. Weathers v. Dep't of the Navy, 2014 MSPB 57 (MSPB 2014). “5 C.F.R. §§ 351.401 , 351.403(a)(1). Generally, a competitive area “must be defined solely in terms of the agency’s organizational unit(s) and geographical location.”
DLA - Holwick v. Dep't of Def. (MSPB 2016). “417 , ¶ 8 (citing 5 C.F.R. §§ 351.401 , 351.403(a)(1)). ¶8 Considering the aforementioned RIF competitive-level principles, it is evident that the GS-9 appellants are not similarly situated to the GS-6/7 rank-and-file officers the agency exempted from the furlough because they…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.