C.F.R. » Title 5 » CHAPTER I—OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT › SUBCHAPTER B—CIVIL SERVICE REGULATIONS › PART 351—REDUCTION IN FORCE › Subpart G—Assignment Rights (Bump and Retreat)

5 C.F.R. § 351.701

Assignment involving displacement

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General. When a competitive service tenure group employee with a current annual performance rating of record of minimally satisfactory (Level 2) or equivalent, or higher, is released from a competitive level, an agency must offer assignment, rather than furlough or separation, in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section to another competitive position that requires no reduction, or the least possible reduction, in representative rate. The employee must be qualified for the offered position. The offered position must be in the same competitive area and have the same type of work schedule (e.g., full-time, part-time, intermittent, or seasonal) as the position from which the employee is released. Upon accepting an offer of assignment, or displacing another employee under this part, an employee retains the same status and tenure in the new position. The promotion potential of the offered position is not a consideration in determining an employee's right of assignment.

(b) Assignment rights. In accordance with paragraph (a) of this section, a released employee shall be assigned to a position:

(1) That is held by another employee with lower retention standing in the same tenure group; and

(2) That is not more than three grades (or appropriate grade intervals or equivalent) below the position from which the employee was released, except that for a preference eligible employee with a compensable service-connected disability of 30 percent or more the limit is five grades (or appropriate grade intervals or equivalent). (The agency uses the grade progression of only the released employee's position of record to determine the applicable grades (or appropriate grade intervals or equivalent) of the employee's assignment right. The agency does not consider the grade progression of the position to which the employee has an assignment right); and

(3) For which the released employee is qualified, pursuant to the criteria set forth in § 351.702 and § 351.703.

(c) Pay rates. (1) The determination of equivalent grade intervals shall be based on a comparison of representative rates.

(2) Each employee's assignment rights shall be determined on the basis of the pay rates in effect on the date of issuance of specific reduction in force notices, except that when it is officially known on the date of issuance of notices that new pay rates have been approved and will become effective by the effective date of the reduction in force, assignment rights shall be determined on the basis of the new pay rates.

(d)(1) In determining applicable grades (or grade intervals) under paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the agency uses the grade progression of the released employee's position of record to determine the grade (or interval) limits of the employee's assignment rights.

(2) For positions covered by the General Schedule, the agency must determine whether a one-grade, two-grade, or mixed grade interval progression is applicable to the position of the released employee.

(3) For positions not covered by the General Schedule, the agency must determine the normal line of progression for each occupational series and grade level to determine the grade (or interval) limits of the released employee's assignment rights. If the agency determines that there is no normal line of progression for an occupational series and grade level, the agency provides the released employee with assignment rights to positions within three actual grades lower on a one-grade basis. The normal line of progression may include positions in different pay systems.

(4) For positions where no grade structure exists, the agency determines a line of progression for each occupation and pay rate and provides assignment rights to positions within three grades (or intervals) lower on that basis.

(5) If the released employee holds a position that is less than three grades above the lowest grade in the applicable classification system (e.g., the employee holds a GS-2 position), the agency provides the released employee with assignment rights up to three actual grades lower on a one-grade basis in other pay systems.

(e) If a competitive area includes more than one local commuting area, the agency determines assignment rights under this part on the basis of the representative rates for one local commuting area within the competitive area (i.e., the same local commuting area used to establish competitive levels under § 351.403(c)(4), (5), and (6)).

(f) If a competitive area includes positions under one or more pay bands, a released employee shall be assigned in accordance with paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section to a position in an equivalent pay band or one pay band lower, as determined by the agency, than the pay band from which released. A preference eligible with a service-connected disability of 30 percent or more must be assigned in accordance with paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section to a position in an equivalent pay band or up to two pay bands lower, as determined by the agency, than the pay band from which released.

(g) If a competitive area includes positions under one or more pay bands, and other positions not covered by a pay band (e.g., GS and/or FWS positions), the agency provides assignment rights under this part by:

(1) Determining the representative rate of positions not covered by a pay band, consistent with § 351.203;

(2) Determining the representative rate of each pay band, or competitive level within the pay band(s), consistent with § 351.203;

(3) As determined by the agency, providing assignment rights under paragraph (b) of this section, consistent with the grade intervals covered in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, and the pay band intervals in paragraph (f) of this section.

[91 FR 49225, Aug. 3, 2026]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases, 1976–2017 · leading case: Clarence Seay, Jr. v. Tennessee Valley Auth. Craven Crowell, 339 F.3d 454 (6th Cir. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Clarence Seay, Jr. v. Tennessee Valley Auth. Craven Crowell, 339 F.3d 454 (6th Cir. 2003). · cites it 3× “Bumping and Retreating Rights; Reemployment Rights Plaintiff also argues that TVA failed to accord him all of his bumping, retreating, and reemployment rights, pursuant to 5 C.F.R. § 351.701 : When a group I or II competitive service employee with a current annual performance…”
Aliotta v. Bair, 614 F.3d 556 (D.C. Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “Moreover, the “bump” and “retreat” rights of FDIC employees subject to a RIF are complex, see 5 C.F.R. § 351.701 ; Aliotta v. Bair, Decl.”
Breen v. Mineta, 253 F. Supp. 3d 244 (D.D.C. 2017). “pdf (last visited May 4, 2017), governs plaintiffs’ "bump-and-retreat” rights, not the regulations on which plaintiffs rely, 5 C.F.R. §§ 351.701 -.705. Def. Supp. Rep.”
Schucker v. Fed. Deposit Ins., 401 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “5 C.F.R. § 351.701 (c)(1) (2002). On March 4, 2002, the Agency informed Schueker that she had no retreat rights.”
Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 895 F.2d 152 (4th Cir. 1990). · cites it 3× “5 C.F.R. § 351.701 . “Bumping” is the right of one employee to displace another employee in a position on the basis of subgroup superiority.”
Jonathan W. Chudson v. Env't Prot. Agency, 17 F.3d 380 (Fed. Cir. 1994). · cites it 2× “” 5 C.F.R. § 351.701 (a)(4) (1983). The RIF regulations were amended in late 1983.”
Rasmussen v. United States, 211 Ct. Cl. 260 (Ct. Cl. 1976). “The focus of the several administrative appeals was Rasmussen’s assignment rights under 5 C.F.R. §§ 351.701 ,351.703 (1974); the Civil Service Commission had to decide whether Rasmussen was entitled to bump one of two GS-12 Electronics Engineers or whether, instead, he was…”
Smith v. Johnson, 968 F. Supp. 439 (E.D. Ark. 1997). · cites it 7× “First, plaintiff claims that he should have been given the right to retreat to the position of Custodial Inspector pursuant to 5 C.F.R. § 351.701 (c) (1991). Second, plaintiff claims that he was discharged in violation of agency policy.”
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 -.”
Paul G. Madsen v. Vets. Admin., 754 F.2d 343 (Fed. Cir. 1985). “An employee is qualified for assignment under 5 C.F.R. § 351.701 if the employee “meets the OPM standards and requirements for the position.”
Black v. Tomlinson, 425 F. Supp. 2d 101 (D.D.C. 2006). “(See 5 C.F.R. § 351.701 (providing certain employees with assignment rights to positions “no more than three grades .”
Palmer v. United States, 794 F.2d 534 (9th Cir. 1986). “See 5 C.F.R. § 351.701 (a); Supplemental Declaration of Robert G.”
Show all 26 citing cases →
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.