Search:

Custom Search

Fired Fed Had Multiple Reasons for Not Going to Work But Stays Fired

By Susan Smith

Wednesday, November 14, 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!

A law enforcement employee at Homeland Security, fired for failing to report to work on several occasions, was unable to persuade an arbitrator and the federal appeals court to overturn the removal. (Hawkins v. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, C.A.F.C. No. 2007-3213 (nonprecedential), 11/13/07)

Prior to her removal, Hawkins had been demoted because of her reckless behavior involving handling firearms. Her supervisor subsequently had to set up a special schedule stemming from her unsatisfactory attendance record. (Opinion, p. 2)

The final straw was when Hawkins left the job after her previously approved one-week leave had been cancelled due to the imminent arrival of Hurricane Katrina. When the agency realized that she had left for vacation anyway, it put Hawkins in a leave-without-pay status. Adding insult to injury, Hawkins did not return from leave until the day after the previously scheduled leave period. Additionally, over the next several weeks, Hawkins had several instances of failure to report for duty without authorized leave. (pp. 2-3)

The agency removed Hawkins for her unauthorized absences. Her appeal went to arbitration. The arbitrator sustained the removal, finding that mitigating circumstances Hawkins raised in her defense were insufficient to overcome the agency's decision to remove her. (p. 3)

Hawkins took her case to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. The court has now affirmed the arbitrator's ruling.

In her appeal, Hawkins challenged the arbitrator's witness credibility determinations since the arbitrator had found the agency witnesses more credible than her witnesses. The court points out that in doing so, Hawkins bears "a heavy burden….[since] credibility determinations are ‘virtually unreviewable' by appellate courts." (p. 5; citation omitted) Her "conclusory assertions to the effect that the arbitrator erred" do not meet the burden. (Id.)

Hawkins also argued legal error in that the arbitrator allowed the agency to consider her previous discipline when making its decision to fire her. The court finds that "Homeland Security did not improperly factor such conduct into its removal decision without providing Ms. Hawkins notice…" (pp. 5-6)

In short, Ms. Hawkins removal by Homeland Security is affirmed.

© 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

  • Nice comments, in reading the actual case rather than that of the narrative. She was NOT a law enforcement officer at the time of the Katrina absence (September 2005). Her mother was killed in a hurricane in 2004. She was not fired immediately after returning from the Katrina absence and in fact mis...
    Posted: November 16, 2007 1:50 PM
  • Why didn't she just go to work and do nothing? I don't get it. I mean if you are lazy, that's the smarter thng to do....
    Posted: November 15, 2007 8:17 PM
  • Another example of how some individuals will go to any length to abuse the system. I have long been a supporter of the idea that in cases such as this one the person filing the case should have to pay the gov't expenses. The cost of this case was easily into the six figures when all expenses are c...
    Posted: November 14, 2007 2:25 PM

View All Comments »

 HTML  Text

MORE BY SUSAN SMITH

More »