Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 41
Page 1 of 4

« Previous | Next »

Delivering Mail and Kissing The Customer Leads to Removal

Delivering mail and kissing the customer

HR Asst
IRS
Wed Jun 10, 2009 9:30 AM

Post Reply

Another story about "going postal"?

Re: Delivering mail and kissing the customer

HR Specialist
DOD
Wed Jun 10, 2009 9:50 AM
It seems to be more of a story about going 'anal'. I can buy the former postal employees arguement about providing better customer service. This case seems to set a precedent for anyone to make a claim against someone they have an issue with because there is no requirement for proof. Because the accusers story seemed more credible, does it mean that she was telling the truth? It was basically his word against hers. He should have used his insanity defense. Unless he is insane, there's definitely more to the story than was revealed. They must have had some type of relationship prior to this incident. I just can't imagine that someone would commit such a random action knowing the possible consequences.

Re: Delivering mail and kissing the customer

Diversity Manager
DOL
Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:58 PM
HR I agree. I see it every day as CS file EEO ans MSBS and Union complaints every day for sheer nonsense

Too many episodes of desperate housewives!

CSO
FDA
Wed Jun 10, 2009 9:49 AM

Post Reply

This guy obviously watched too many episodes of desperate housewives. Now, he knows the difference between TV and real life.

Creditability of one vs. another

worker
Fed
Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:17 AM

Post Reply

First, I believe preponderence of evidence rules.
Second, I would like to know why the woman's testimony was more creditable than the postal worker's testimony.
Third, we as government workers, must be very careful when performing our jobs if we deal with the public. One never knows when a customer decides to go postal and report the worker to a manager or higher. Your job is on the line. You may be innocent or guilty, but if the deciders do not believe you or do not want to believe you, you are in trouble.
I am not saying the postal worker is guilty or innocent. I do not know. All I am saying is be careful. I was accused. Management did not believe me. The accusers made accusations, some of which were proven to be false. Management still did not believe me. I did not do what I was accused of. It did not matter. I was suspended, but not fired.
Be careful.

Re: Creditability of one vs. another

Attorney
Fed Agency
Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:26 AM
worker, the reasons why the woman's testimony was found to be more credible by the AJ are described in the article and detailed in the linked Federal Circuit decision. Maybe you should actually read the whole article before asking questions.

Re: Creditability of one vs. another

HR Specialist
Small Agency
Thu Jun 11, 2009 9:24 AM
She was found more credible because she had more detail in her statement and told it to a couple of different people. Or maybe she's just a better liar and knows how to stick to her story. This is why I have a problem with the lower burden of proof standards in the employee appeal process than the judicial process. If this guy really did what she said he did, he should have been charged with assault, gone to trial, had a verdict placed against him, and then been fired if he was found guilty.

Re: Creditability of one vs. another

worker
Fed
Fri Jun 12, 2009 9:30 AM
To Attorney
I read the article. I was not convinced that she met the preponderance of evidence rules. That is why I made the comment.
Also his statements were not given much space.
I cannot download the actual case, so I went by the article. Sorry, it is the best I have.

Mail delivery and Kissing

Fed Employee
Federal Govt
Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:19 AM

Post Reply

Sounds a lot like the biblical story of "Joseph and Pharoah's Wife. She accused Joseph of trying to rape her but, he didn't and, he was sent to jail anyway.
Seems to me that, in a cases like this, they use the "CSI Test." If in fact he did assault her and this is what she is alledging then, they should scan the clothing she had on for "D&A" to see if any of his D&A is on her clothing. They should swarb her mouth and his mouth to see if there is any D&A there as well.

When someone is charged with "Assaulting" another individual, just because the woman's story sounds credible doesn't mean it is, (Pharoah's Wife's story sound credible too and Pharoah believed it but, it wasn't) and an innocent man went to Jail this is a serious charge and the word of one person over another person should not be taken until the individual's story is tested for truth. MSPB should be using more reliable methods than just the Story "Sounds Credible" to determine if the Mail Carrier is guilty.

Re: Mail delivery and Kissing

Unhigh on the Food Chain
VA
Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:41 AM
Perhaps his past has come back to haunt him.

Re: Mail delivery and Kissing

clerk
DOI
Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:51 AM
It's DNA, not D&A.

Re: Mail delivery and Kissing

Civilian
Navy
Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:09 AM
I assume you mean DNA. This was not a criminal trial; it was an administrative proceeding, so DNA testing would not be done. While the article doesn't elaborate, since the police were called, there may have been an arrest, we don't know. There may be a lot more to the story than either party is letting on.

Re: Mail delivery and Kissing

Attorney
Fed Agency
Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:37 AM
Fed Employee, your comments make no sense. This is not a criminal offense. No one is going to "jail." No "swarbing" (whatever that is) is needed to determine if the woman is lying - the burden of proof here is simply a preponderance of the evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

And HR Specialist and Fed Employee, there is nothing unusual about how the credibility determination was made in this case. If you would take the time to read the linked decision, you would see that this determination was based upon several factors, including the AJ's observation of the witnesses' demeanor during testimony and the consistency of the testimony with other statements made by the witness. These are long-standing and acceptable methods of judging credibility in MSPB cases. Read the Hillen line of MSPB cases if you don't understand this.

Re: Mail delivery and Kissing

IT Manager
DOE
Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:27 PM
Fed Employee: the biblical analogy is "Joseph and Potiphar's wife", not "Pharaoh's wife".

There is one aspect of this case that I find troubling regarding the series of events that occurred after the alledged assault. Why did Ms. Llmberger wait several hours after the incident to tell someone, and then an entire day to report it to authorities? Also, why did she not tell her husband immediately?

According to the case transcript, Ms. Llmberger did not even report the incident until several hours later, and then simply told her neighbor, Ms. Christensen. She then waited until the next day to attempt to contact her husband, and failing to reach him, she instead told an employee of a coffee shop owned by her husband's family, through whom her brother-in-law ostensibly learned of the alledged incident - her husband still did not know. Ms. Llmberger did not even call the police until asked to by the post office customer service manager. Something's wrong with this picture.

Deliver the mail and kissing

Patient Business Assistant
VA
Wed Jun 10, 2009 10:57 AM

Post Reply

You all are right. There's no telling if that man & woman had an undercover relationship in which that behavior was allowed before, & now she doesn't want it anymore. Nor do we know if she/he was took a flirtation too far. I would have liked to see some DNA testing. That would have told the real tale. Too many times people are accused of things that aren't true. Often VA patients tell lies on employee's to get things (meds, faster appt., etc) or revenge because they didn't like "the tone" of the perosn they talked to. Sometimes it isn't a matter of tone, but content of what was relayed (refusal to do something), that's the real culprit. If one feels like they're owed a service (like mail being hand carried and put in the house) & that doesn't happen, people can get real nasty. Then again (playing devils advocate here) sometimes people can take a kind gesture or slight flirtation as a invitation, & take it too far. The on scene cop should've swabbed something or someone.

Re: Deliver the mail and kissing

Diversity Manager
DOL
Wed Jun 10, 2009 7:04 PM
No question about it having been treated in the VA and see what goes on there every vet should be given a swab to get the DNA from the workers. Especially those who abuse the patients. They all should get camcorders so they can take pictures of no one checking on them as required

Delivering the Mail and Kissing

Patient Business Assistant
VA
Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:12 AM

Post Reply

Second thought here. Why did the woman tell her neighbor first, instead of the police? And if he truly assaulted her, why wasn't he arrested? That's a felony. The cops let him go. Normally if you assault someone you go to jail instantly. Especially in this case considering the type of assault. It's almost the equivalent to attempted rape especially since he supposedly gave her a condom and said he'd be back later, that's considered a threat of rape (sorry for the rant, my cousin's a cop). Shouldn't those facts have been considered by MSPB and the postal service when investigating the validity of her story?

Removal

Human Resources Specialist
IRS
Wed Jun 10, 2009 11:20 AM

Post Reply

The employee admitted that he deviated from his route and the woman's story was credible. I am presuming that the Post Officv investigated the incident and found the employee's credibility lacking, so I am unclear why the woman's comments and credibility are suspect to the respondents to the article. Taxpayers have alleged harrassment by IRS employees in violation of Section 1203(b) of the Reform and Restructuting Act; the allegations are investigated, and in most instances management determined that the employee acted appropriately. I am assuming that the post office also conducts investigations of allegations before proposing action and then acts based on the prepondeance of evidenve. Cabrera should have concentrated on delivering the mail and not the male.

Total Comments: 41
Page 1 of 4

« 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.