The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed an MSPB decision finding that a GS-13 General Services Administration (“GSA”) employee who claimed that after a temporary promotion he continued to perform the duties of a GS-14 employee was not constructively demoted.
Merit Systems Protection Board - FEDmanager - News for feds
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the reviewing court of the Merit Systems Protection Board, reversed a Board decision denying relief for a personnel action taken by the Department of Justice, finding that the Board’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence.
The Merit Systems Protection Board appeal of a GS-13 Physical Security Specialist with the United States Navy was dismissed with prejudice after the MSPB found that the employee repeatedly failed to file a “perfected petition.”
On December 5, 2016, the Merit Systems Protection Board released a new report, entitled “Adverse Actions: A Compilation of Articles.”
A Postal Service employee appealing the agency’s failure to restore her to a position after she was injured and gained new medical restrictions argued that the position she was restored to was so unreasonable as to be an effective denial of her restoration, but her appeal was limited to the time period before she was restored.
A Materials Engineer fired from the Department of the Navy for being absent without leave and falsifying time records successfully appealed the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board to affirm his removal.
The Merit Systems Protection Board vacated an administrative judge’s dismissal of a constructive suspension case after finding that the employee nonfrivolously alleged that she lacked a meaningful choice of whether to go to work against her doctor’s orders.
A Veterans Affairs police officer was charged with lack of candor, among other charges and specifications, and although the Board sustained the employee’s removal, it reversed the charge of Lack of Candor, clarifying the law in the process.
The Merit Systems Protection Board reversed the termination of a Department of Veterans Affairs employee who was terminated after the Agency discovered that a current probation agreement bound the employee to inform prospective employers of his status and prohibited the use of computers with online services and the use of data encryption.
The Merit Systems Protection Board granted the petition for review of a former employee overpaid by $84,546.02, allowing the employee a major adjustment in his monthly repayment, and applying new language from the Office of Personnel Management on the nature of the employee’s ongoing debt.
On May 23, 2016, the Merit Systems Protection Board issued its Spring newsletter, which included its adjudication statistics for Fiscal Year 15.
A former employee’s second Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (“USERRA”) appeal regarding an alleged hostile work environment was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction by the Merit Systems Protection Board as it found that re-litigating the issues on appeal was barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel.
The Merit Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”) clarified the legal requirements for proving an affirmative defense of EEO discrimination after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed that its use of the phrase “convincing mosaic,” considered a type of circumstantial evidence, was meant to be a metaphor, rather than a legal test.
The Merit Systems Protection Board remanded a case to the administrative judge because the charges were not reviewed solely on the bases invoked by the agency.
The Merit Systems Protection Board reversed the decision of an administrative judge, finding that actual knowledge of an employee’s protected whistleblowing disclosures is not the only way to show that the employee’s disclosures were a “contributing factor” for a personnel action.
Despite a negative passover decision from OPM, the Merit Systems Protection Board found that the Agency’s subsequent withdrawal of a job offer from a veteran with a 10-point preference was not improper.
A Department of Veterans Affairs employee who had been indefinitely suspended after a grand jury indictment related to the allegedly unauthorized closing of over 2,700 unresolved consults for medical care had his indefinite suspension upheld by the Merit Systems Protection Board.
On June 17, 2016, the Merit Systems Protection Board held that an appellant’s testimony during an Administrative Investigation Board (“AIB”) investigation is not protected activity under 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(9)(B), which protects agency employees that testify or lawfully assist individuals in the exercise of appeal, complaint, or grievance rights.
On January 3, 2017, the United States House of Representatives passed a House Resolution, adopting rules for the 115th Congress.