The author points out that federal employees take an oath of office as part of their job duties, much like the president does. He analyzes the meaning behind this oath as it relates to one’s duties as a federal worker.
Should federal employees be “at will” employees? It is unlikely changes of this magnitude outlined in a recent bill will be implemented as there will be fierce opposition. Here is a summary.
There will no longer be a quorum at the MSPB later this week. This means decisions on Petitions for Review cannot be issued. Here is the situation.
Accepting reimbursement for services that were actually paid for by a relative leads to a federal employee’s removal.
The author says that the VA Accountability First and Appeals Modernization Act uses a carrot and stick approach to reforming the agency, but that it currently offers too many sticks for dealing with problem employees and not enough carrots to reward good employees.
The author says that when one digs into the VA Accountability First and Appeals Modernization Act of 2016, there is a lot more to it than the title would have you believe.
Incidents of anger, outbursts and threats in the workplace lead the agency to suspend then fire a long-standing employee.
The author says that one of the most time consuming and frustrating tasks for supervisors is dealing with the small number of employees who abuse leave.
An IRS employee who cursed out a taxpayer in front of several witnesses could not persuade the court that his removal was unwarranted.
The author says that it is a well established fact that managers have the right to establish standards for requiring employee attendance at work. He notes, however, that failure to enforce attendance requirements can result in further attendance problems and lower morale among employees. He says that supervisors should never be afraid to initiate the appropriate action when warranted and cites some cases as precedent for enforcing consistent attendance in the federal workplace.
