A personnel specialist with 30 years of federal service argued that his long employment history and a recent mid-term evaluation should have been considered in a decision to remove him from federal service. But, says a federal court, the only performance that is relevant in this case is his performance during a 60-day evaluation period. His removal stands.
A majority of a federal appeals court finds that lack of sexual desire is a major life function giving rise to disability discrimination. A strong dissent argues that the issue is one the government has no business inquiring into or knowing and should not be held accountable for discrimination under these circumstances.
Searching for an angle in his appeal, this former Postal Service employee argued the agency erroneously believed it would not hire an ex-felon. He also argued he should get priority consideration because he was a veteran. But a federal court finds the MSPB did not have jurisdiction in his appeal.
The DC Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned a lower court’s summary judgment and sent a federal agent’s discrimination complaint under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 back for trial.
The Army had “legitimate management considerations” for reassigning an engineer to Ft. Riley, Kansas. An appropriate penalty for refusing to move is removal and, in this case, the employee’s refusal to move was upheld by the MSPB and a federal court.
A “last chance” agreement usually means that an employee will be fired if there is a similar problem in the future. When this Postal Service employee argued removal was inappropriate because of her long service record, the last chance agreement still carried the day and the employee remains a former federal employee.
An auditor with the Inspector General for DoD was fired after losing his security clearance. His removal was upheld by the MSPB but a federal court gives him a second shot at overturning his removal.
An information technology specialist filed appeals after he was fired for not properly filing federal tax returns for four years and not paying taxes on time for three of those years. The removal till stands.
The charges in this case sound like a scenario from an action adventure novel but the Army was not impressed. The specifications leading to this employee’s removal included failing to turn over a weapon, not getting permission to fly in a restricted military airspace and disobeying air traffic control. The MSPB and a federal court were not impressed either and the employee stays fired.
This Dept. of Veterans Affairs employee filled out a background investigation form but provided inaccurate answers to certain questions. She was fired and the MSPB and a federal court upheld her removal.
