Search:

Custom Search

Nine Minutes Late! "You're Out of Here!"

By Susan Smith

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

You can have daily headlines from FedSmith.com delivered right to your desktop each business morning. The service is free and you don't get junk e-mail as the price of your subscription. Just visit our newsletter page to sign up!

Here’s a recent case that should help dispel the myth that it’s impossible to fire a federal employee. (Jones v. United States Postal Service, C.A.F.C. No. 2006-3361 (nonprecedential), 2/9/07) The facts are taken from the court’s opinion.

Jones was a mail processing clerk in Gary, Indiana. The agency removed him based on three charges: unacceptable conduct, insubordination, and absence without leave.

The unacceptable conduct charge involved Jones being nine minutes late from a scheduled work break. The insubordination charge came about from his refusal to obey a supervisor’s directive to move an all-purpose container from the work area, approximately two feet. When he refused to move the container, the supervisor ordered Jones to remove himself from the facility. Jones refused to obey that order several times until the police were called to escort him out. The AWOL charge was for 8 hours when he failed to return to work when instructed in writing. (Opinion, pp. 1-2)

Jones appealed his removal to the Merit Systems Protection Board. On the unacceptable conduct charge, Jones admitted he returned from his break nine minutes late. But he argued to the Board and the court that he was late leaving for his break and was therefore justified. The Board found that Jones’ machine was left unattended as a consequence and concluded that he therefore should have returned on time. As to the insubordination charge, the Board concluded from the evidence that Jones’ argument that it would have been unsafe to move the container amounted to “frivolous” safety allegations. The Board did not sustain the 3rd charge, but held that the first two charges were sufficient to warrant Jones’ removal. (pp. 2-3)

The appeals court now affirms, concluding there was substantial evidence to support the Board’s findings and conclusions. Jones argued to the court that removal was disproportionate and cited his ten years with the agency as well as his military service medals. Apparently sympathetic to Jones, the court nevertheless upheld the removal: “Although it seems to us to be a close decision and a harsh penalty, the removal was within the agency’s discretionary authority, the agency directing our attention to previous notices to Mr. Jones concerning the need to obey orders.” (pp. 4-5)

© 2009 FedSmith Inc. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced without express written consent of FedSmith Inc.

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.

Readers' Comments

  • I am another federal employee who received the harshest of penalties all because I observed fraud in the office and reported it to United States Marshal. This upset him so much, he retaliated with poor performance charges after 29 years of receiving nothing but outstanding ratings. Agency of cours...
    Posted: December 12, 2008 4:26 AM
  • We just had a simular thing happen to a new employee he was late a total of four times two were legitimate. But the other two were BS he wasnt late Our boss requires us to show up 5 minutes before we are paid and they used that to terminate him. The boss even told the union that no union member woul...
    Posted: July 25, 2007 5:40 PM
  • Many of the comments state that a removal is too harsh for Mr. Jones. Some even suggest that he should have had a 30 day suspension. There is a concept of progressive discipline here. Please note that Mr. Jones had already received a 30 day suspension, but it did not correct the problem. To get ...
    Posted: February 26, 2007 9:14 AM

View All Comments »

MORE BY SUSAN SMITH

Contact Susan Smith or read more articles on the author's page.