An immigration official caught up in an incident where three fellow officers injured an illegal alien during a raid remains fired from his agency following review of his case in which he contended he was a whistleblower.
This Postal Service supervisor was demoted for not properly giving the union information or not scheduling required meetings. The result was grievances going to a higher level and decisions and awards in the grievants’ favor. The demotion eventually went to federal court for a final decision.
Back in 2006, a letter carrier hit a co-worker which led to removal of this letter carrier. The removal was appealed and the man who was fired claimed hitting his co-worker in the face was an accident. The case went to federal court.
This federal employee who worked for the Postal Service apparently intentionally flunked a required training program and asked if one of the instructors had an Uzi. The employee had three prior suspensions and was fired for this one. It went to federal court for resolution.
A Department of Education employee was transferred but apparently kept using the travel card after her travel authorization expired. She also didn’t report for work at the new location. She was fired and filed an appeal arguing she was a whistleblower. Neither the Court nor the MSPB found that argument convincing.
An employee of the Dept. of Veterans Affairs was fired for failing to follow a supervisor’s instructions and then used “disrespectful language and made inappropriate statements.” The employee argued that she was a whistleblower and that the agency had committed procedural error but, after all appeals, remains a former federal employee.
Can an agency reassign a federal employee to a position the employee considers less desirable without giving an employee the right to appeal? In this case, the MSPB and the Court gave a clear answer.
How long can it take for a removal action against a federal employee to run its course? Here is an example of how a federal employee who was removed but with skill, determination, and active supporters has kept a case going for a few years, and still has room to keep it running.
The Federal Circuit of Appeals has concluded that the OPM regulation on excepted service positions violates the law. It is “at odds with the statutory protections Congress guaranteed these [30% or more disabled] veterans.”
A federal employee argued that her resignation was involuntary and therefore an adverse action. The case went back to court a second time after the employee, who had been working on a movie set with her husband while supposedly caring for him in his dying days, appealed the denial from MSPB.