Zero Tolerance Policy Upheld
By Susan Smith
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Bagbee was a 20-year employee with the Postal Service, working as a Laborer in San Francisco. During a meeting with his first and second level supervisors, Bagbee made threats against the supervisors’ family members. According to their testimony, Bagbee “threatened to rape and kill Mr. Daniels’s [the second-level supervisor] wife, daughter and son, and also to go to Ms. Ramos’s [Bagbee’s first-level supervisor] house while her husband was working and rape and kill Ms. Ramos’s children and then slash Ms. Ramos’s throat.” (Opinion, pp. 2-2)
Citing its zero tolerance policy for workplace threats, the USPS removed Bagbee. He took his appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board. Following a hearing, the Administrative Judge found that the agency had borne its factual burden; that Bagbee had violated the zero tolerance policy; that the agency’s case met the standard of proof for adverse actions based on threats, citing Metz v. Dep’t of Treasury, 780 F.2d 1001 (Fed. Cir. 1986); that Bagbee’s removal promoted the efficiency of the service; and that the removal penalty was appropriate. (p. 2)
The full Board declined to review the initial decision, and Bagbee took his case to the appeals court. The court affirmed the Board and upheld Bagbee’s removal. The court had this to say on the agency’s zero tolerance policy: “We have also held that absolute performance standards, such as the USPS’s zero tolerance policy, are permissible….” (p. 3; citations omitted)
© 2009 FedSmith Inc. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced without express written consent of FedSmith Inc.
|
Readers' Comments
Posted: February 16, 2007 1:50 PM
Posted: February 16, 2007 1:48 PM
Posted: February 16, 2007 11:50 AM
View All Comments »