An Army Equal Employment Opportunity Manager fired for disgraceful conduct and making false statements, was unsuccessful in her challenge before the appeals court. (King v. Department of the Army, C.A.F.C. No. 2007-3186 (nonprecedential), 10/30/07)
King’s troubles began when she was erroneously issued a travel check in the amount of $4,158. The agency discovered its error immediately, and her bosses explained to King that she was not legally entitled to the funds. She was specifically instructed by her supervisor not to cash the check. You guessed it – she cashed the check anyway, told the agency she had never received it and claimed that her ex-husband had been the one to cash it. King eventually admitted that she was the culprit. (Opinion, p. 2)
The agency took a dim view of King’s actions and fired her. The charges were false statements, lying to a supervisor, and disgraceful conduct. On appeal, the Merit Systems Protection Board held a hearing and found that Army had proved its charges and had properly weighed the "Douglas" factors in deciding upon the removal penalty. (p. 2)
Among other things, King argued to the appeals court that the penalty was extreme and unfair, given that this was her first offense, and the Board should have reduced it. However, the court sided with the Board. The court quotes this portion of the Administrative Judge’s decision: "…[T]he agency has shown that it gave adequate consideration to the Douglas factors and …properly exercised its managerial discretion in selecting the penalty of removal." (p. 4)
