answer the question whether the resignation which was given was coerced.’’). 26 . See, e.g., Scharf, 710 F.2d at 1575-76 (ordering agency to cancel protected civil service employee's involuntary retirement and reinstate him to his former position with back pay). The federal Back Pay Act, which applies to the District of Columbia government, provides that an employee who has suffered wage loss as the result of "an unjustified or unwarranted personnel action” is entitled to full restitution. 5 U.S.C. § 5596(b)(1) (2007); see Mitchell v. District of Columbia, 736 A.2d 228, 230-32 (D.C.1999). 27 . See footnote 18, supra. MPD has advised the court that the position of inspector is an at-will position like that of commander. 28 . District of Columbia v. Califano, 647 A.2d 761, 765 (D.C.1994) (<HOLDING>). See Miller v. Avirom, 127 U.S.App. D.C. 367,
holding appellant waived argument by failing to assert it at suppression hearing holding the government waived its argument on appeal that the defendant did not have standing to challenge a search when it failed to raise the argument to the district court holding that the defendant waived argument on appeal by failing to develop a cogent argument holding that district of columbia waived its argument that appellees were not entitled to an income tax credit by failing to assert the argument in the trial court holding that the appellees argument was waived because they had expressly abandoned the argument before the administrative agency