Search:

Custom Search

"Chain of Command" and Federal Whistleblowers

By Susan Smith

Wednesday, October 24, 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!

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the removal of a Navy employee, but at the same time expressed "substantial doubt" about the "validity" of an agency policy requiring employees to submit emails through the chain of command. (Detrich v. Department of the Navy, C.A.F.C. No. 2007-3100 (nonprecedential), 10/22/07)

Detrich was removed based on eight misconduct charges. The Merit Systems Protection Board sustained 7 of the 8 charges and found that removal was reasonable. The 7 charges sustained involved failure to follow instructions and comply with deadlines in connection with different specific assignments, unauthorized absence, and failure to follow agency policy requiring sending emails through the chain of command. (Opinion pp. 1-2)

The court's concern centered on the last charge sustained by the Board. The problem was that Detrich's noncompliant email went to the regional Human Resources Service Center and concerned alleged incidents of abuse by certain of Detrich's supervisors. The Board concluded that this email violated the written instruction to Detrich that he was to follow the chain of command and address issues with his immediate supervisor. (p. 2)

The court stated, "We have substantial doubt as to the validity of that policy under the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 …[WPA]…An agency cannot require that protected disclosures be made only to supervisory personnel." (p. 2; citations omitted)

The rub is that Detrich's attorney did not raise a WPA claim. Further, the court concluded that the other sustained charges were such that removal "was not disproportionate…." (p. 3)

While Detrich lost his appeal and this decision is "nonprecedential," nevertheless agencies may want to pay heed to the court's concerns about a "chain of command" policy as it relates to whistleblower-type communications.

© 2008 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

  • NEVER REPORT: Misconduct, faud, waste, or abuse. ALL management and supervisorys (to include HR & EEO) will protect the guilt & cover up. I have seen this a hundred times. This is another case of someone reporting the truth & that person telling the truth got sacked. Look at your HR/E...
    Posted: October 30, 2007 2:52 PM
  • Several years ago I tried going through the chain of command to report my immediate supervisor only to find out that following the rules didn't work. After almost a year and filing an EEO complaint I thought it would be over. Instead I was left under his supervision. No way out, but to leave the ...
    Posted: October 30, 2007 10:29 AM
  • As a governmnet employee we are always told to report waste, fraud and abuse. If the fraud concerns your management how can you go thru them hence the chain of command??????...
    Posted: October 29, 2007 2:31 PM

View All Comments »

MORE BY SUSAN SMITH

More »