Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 15
Page 1 of 2

« Previous | Next »

Employee Gets Another Appeal Despite "Last Chance" Agreement

This guy is running out of lives

Program Analyst
OPM
Fri Aug 8, 2008 8:42 AM

Post Reply

After reading this article, all I can say is that if Lizzio wins at the MSPB and gets reinstated into his job, he had better count his blessings and keep his mouth shut for the rest of the time he is employed. Anything else, and anyone with enough common sense will see that he is a behavioral problem and make sure that his removal is justified that time around. He, essentially, is getting a "third" chance, despite signing a "last chance" agreement and having this case go back between the board and the court. How often--as the article implys--do you think that happens?

last chance

low level employee
VA/Dnvr
Fri Aug 8, 2008 9:21 AM

Post Reply

This kind of behavior is commonly tolerated and mgmt looks the other way as long as it is one of their 'favored' employees. It only becomes a problem when it is staff that doesn't kiss up to mgmt that the person is then considered insubordinate and must be dealt with.
In my 16 years with my current agency I have witnessed many employees being and acting disrespectful to senior employees and coworkers. These same people are the first to run to mgmt and cry 'foul' when someone treats them that way. Seems to me that what is tolerated for one needs to be tolerated for all --OR---management can 'grow some' and deal with their "pets" the same as they do with other staff.

Re: last chance

op supe
faa
Sat Aug 9, 2008 5:48 PM
LOW LEVEL: Think about this logically. In fifteen years as a supe, I HAVE come to consider some of my coworkers as favored employees. They got that way by doing their job correctly, conscientiously, courteously and consistently. Those who chose to fight the agency by being rude to customers or coworkers, (that is, being an a*#hole), obviously never made my 'favored' list. I would gladly stand between Hell and these 'favorites' if they so needed. But for the jerks who believe they can abuse anyone and everyone because their union will protect them, I hope (for their family's sake) they're right. Because if disciplinary hell heads their way, I'll be steppin' aside and letting the natural order of things take place. So don't give me that crap about me turning my head to protect the good old boys. My good old boys and gals don't need protecting.

Getting rid of employee

amm
SSA
Fri Aug 8, 2008 9:47 AM

Post Reply

And then people wonder why managers don't want to try to remove a problem employee.

Unbelievable!

Supv HR Manager
Commerce
Fri Aug 8, 2008 9:55 AM

Post Reply

What good is the last chance agreement, it isn't worth the paper it is written on!!! This could change the future course of Federal ER and not in a good way. At what point are people responsible for their own actions? He read and signed the waiver, he knew what was coming to him, now he thinks he should get more chances. MSPB please listen and listen good.... ENOUGH ALREADY....Dismiss this case and uphold the removal! This makes a mockery of our system. This guy is not fit for Federal Service and they can't get rid of him. Unbelievable!

Re: Unbelievable!

HR Manager (Retired)
DoD
Fri Aug 8, 2008 1:13 PM
Last Chance Agreements are an excellent tool if the goal is to correct behavior. We used them with great success. However, when judging whether one of the parties failed to meet the agreement’s conditions great care has to be taken to insure that the decision is based solely on what is in the agreement. In short, a party can not be found to have failed to meet the agreement’s conditions if the conditions are changed or even modified in the slightest manner. This decision will not change the current process involving the use of these agreements as the Court is simply saying that the agency failed in meeting this standard.

Re: Unbelievable!

H.R. Specialist
V.A.
Tue Aug 12, 2008 8:47 AM
I read every word of the article, and the decision ... twice. Since this is my line of work, I wanted to figure out what went wrong (because last chance agreements DO WORK in most cases).

It seems the agency made mistakes. FIRST, they didn't call the offense what it was. Instead of charging the employee with "RUDE BEHAVIOR", they charged him with violating 2 specific regulations. The Administrative Judge was told by the deciding official that "embarrassment to the agency" was a material element in his finding of misconduct. Which was a SECOND mistake: instead of citing regulations that the employee violated, they should have stated a charge and left it alone. The AJ found that although the conduct was "RUDE AND OBNOXIOUS", it was not an embarrassment to the agency. (Her finding, by the way, was supported by the testimony of more than one person.) The court agreed. Lesson learned.

Last Chance Settlements

Retired
USPS
Fri Aug 8, 2008 10:17 AM

Post Reply

I agree with the individual that stated, "Last chance settlements are just that - the last chance." During my career, I saw employees with last chance settlements get second last chance settlements when they failed to meet the conditions of the first settlement - and in 99% of the cases, I disagreed. However, it is important to recognize that there are rare exceptions to the finality of a last chance settlements.

The important point in preparing a last chance settlement is to write it carefully with an eye towards any issue that could potentially nullify the settlement or be grounds for a grievance challenging the settlement in the future.

Rude and Obnoxious

Fed Worker
DOD
Fri Aug 8, 2008 10:22 AM

Post Reply

Having worked in CID the one thing I know you don't do is embarass them, the Army, and the U.S. Government. This guy forgets that that the tax payer is a customer of the agency as well. That said, it is sometimes true that people complain about the Agents as a way to avoid an investigation, or slow it down. It is always better to be polite and use the Court system to get the information one seeks.

Last Chance Agreements

Retired Insulator
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
Fri Aug 8, 2008 12:07 PM

Post Reply

These are weighted so heavily in favor of the agency that no one can avoid violating them. The terms of these agreements are negotiable as I proved to PSNS when I was a Chief Steward there. Using general terms such as "avoiding any misconduct" is detrimental to the employee, yet all these agreements are so basically ambiguous as to be downright obnoxious in their content. I believe in negotiating these I would hold the agency to allege specific types of conduct not to be breached in the agreement. If a person has attendance problems, let those be the basis of the employee failure, not just any generic failure on the part of the employee, such as "spitting on the sidewalk".

Total Comments: 15
Page 1 of 2

« Previous | Next »

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.