A Border Patrol agent who did not come to the aid of another agent asking for help while in a “hostile encounter” was fired by the agency. The fired agent offered the “I was fired because I was a whistleblower” defense that seemingly gets raised routinely in federal appeals. That didn’t fly nor did his argument that his colleague wasn’t really in trouble so a court upholds the removal action.
Federal agencies have considerable power and authority. Federal employees have to be wary of trying to improperly use their position for personal gain or for other reasons unrelated to their official job requirements. This agent of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency was fired for misuse of his position and the removal is upheld by the MSPB and a federal court.
A mother and son worked at the same agency. The mother was a human resources specialist. Both of them were fired. The son was fired for falsification of job applications in the agency’s automated program. The son’s appeal went to federal court but the court upheld the credibility determination made by the administrative judge and he stays fired.
A financial economist complained that her supervisor took adverse personnel actions against her in retaliation for whistleblowing. The administrative judge and the MSPB blew off the allegations but a federal court sends the case back to the Board. It found, among other things, that the Board erred in holding that an action that never actually occurred cannot serve as the basis for a protected disclosure.
While the Air Force tolerated (an employee) continuing in his job “despite his inability to perform his full duties, the Air Force was not required to do so indefinitely.”
An employee of DHS was fired by the agency for unauthorized absences on numerous occasions. The former fed went to federal court after having an arbitrator rule against her. In court, she argued the agency had improperly considered previous disciplinary actions in its decision.
In addition to the typical defense that he was fired because he was a “whistleblower”, this Air Force employee argued that his “employment contract” with the government did not outline the standard of review for indefinite suspensions. Fortunately for agencies, the court held that an agency is not required prior to hiring a new employee “to provide…all the case law that may become relevant….”
A firefighter at a Naval Air Station had 26 years of federal service. He had a big problem with duty assignments and complained at length in a “loud and abrasive” manner. He got fired and then contended the removal was based on retaliation for being a whistleblower. It didn’t work and a court upholds the removal.
For a harassment claim to succeed, among other things the plaintiff has to show that her employer knew (or should have known) about the harassment and did nothing to stop it. In this case, the atmosphere in the federal group sounded like a script from a popular sitcom. But the employee waited several months to complain. The end result was a summary judgment decision for the agency.
An employee of the Merit Systems Protection Board applied for a job at another agency. He was entitled to veterans’ preference but he was not selected for the job. A federal court upholds the agency’s handling of the personnel action as an agency is not limited “to the competitive examination process in making its final selection.”
