This federal supervisor lost his job when he left threatening notes and left work without approval. His removal is upheld by the MSPB and a federal court, in part because another agency supervisor was concerned about his safety and security and took precautions to protect himself and his family as a result of the threats.
A federal employee fell out of his vehicle and it struck a parked car. The employee was fired. The MSPB and a federal court says the removal was reasonable under the circumstances.
A federal attorney found himself the subject of an independent counsel’s investigation as a result of the investigation of former HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros. The federal attorney also found himself saddled with more than $22,000 in attorney fees as a result of the investigation. He petitioned to get the fees reimbursed and a court gives him the money.
What was the reason for firing this federal employee? He argued it was because he was called up for military duty. The agency said it was because he had involvement with convicted felons in his outside employment.
The Dept. of Energy initiated an adverse action against an employee what was not physically able to perform his job. The employee elected to retire “under protest” and filed an appeal. He will apparently continue to be a retired federal employee.
A federal employee had second thoughts about the settlement agreement he signed. “Buyer’s remorse” doesn’t count though.
A federal court has thrown out a long line of MSPB decisions that held the cancellation of a vacancy announcement is not a personnal action. The decision means a former federal employee gets to have his case heard by the MSPB.
An arbitrator upheld the firing of a Customs patrol agent. But a federal court sends the case back to the arbitrator based on its conclusion that the agency did not prove that the employee had a “loss of qualifications.”
This FBI office was involved in its own form of internal warfare with one employee allegedly threatening to reveal the identify of an FBI colleague to a “target organization” of the FBI’s counter-terrorism and counter-intelligence unit.
A court of appeals finds that OPM had an obligation to to check out the facts of a case that impact the election of a survivor annuity. The case is therefore sent back to the Board for a new decision based on the finding of the court.
