P  E  R  M  E  R  I  C  A  .  C O M


white girl blues

debbie davies    g - v
1 mb

lucinda williams    g - v
1 mb

kate earl    g - v
1 mb

read & listen    THE  WRITER'S  ALMANAC    every day

Excellent Podcast - Bullseye with Jesse Thorn
Guest: Comedian J.B. Smoove (excerpt)
Listen / Download Full 30 min Interview

♦       Aug 23, 2019 .. DAVID KOCH DEAD AT 79 : Billionaire who fueled the right-wing movement, one of the richest men in the world and philanthropist.

♦       Aug 23, 2019  .. NJSC:  Portilla v. Maxim  ..  Plaintiff, a registered nurse and a lawyer, worked for defendant, Maxim HealthCare Services, Inc., as Director of Clinical Services (Director) for its South Orange office from April 8, 2013, through September 27, 2013, when she resigned, claiming she was constructively discharged.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 23, 2019 .. GSA IG:  GSA OFFICIAL CONSUMED ALCOHOL, HAD SEXUAL INTERCOURSE AND ORAL SEX WITH A WHITE HOUSE INTERN IN GSA HEADQUATERS : On January 30, 2018, Hart was interviewed and admitted he had sexual relations in the GSA Central Office during the weekend of July, 1, 2017.    Hart identified his partner as [REDACTED] [an intern] at the White House.    He stated he escorted [REDACTED] into the GSA Central Office building and made them each a drink with the bottle of vodka he kept in his desk.    He said their sexual activity began in the Administrator suite area and culminated with oral sex on the rooftop of the Central Office. Hart stated this occurred on only one occasion.    A review of the visitor building logs for the Central Office for January through December 2017 revealed [REDACTED] entered the building on July 1, 2017 at 7:26 PM.    Per 5 C.F.R. § 2635.704 (a) an employee has a duty to not allow the use of Government property for anything other than authorized purposes.    Having sex in the central office building is not an authorized purpose for use by the public.    Further, there is no law or GSA regulation that allows an employee to have sex in the building.   GSA IG   Report of Investigation.

♦       Aug 23, 2019  .. CAT:  Edinburg v. Esparza  ..  Esparza was the principal of one of Edinburg Consolidated Independent School District's (ECISD) middle schools in the summer of 2016. After school was dismissed for the summer, a private photo of Esparza that she sent to her husband was widely disseminated on social media within the local community. According to Esparza, the photo was not authorized to be publicly disseminated and she complained to law enforcement.    On June 22, 2016, Esparza and the ECISD assistant superintendent had a conversation in which Esparza was given the choice of resigning or being fired.    Esparza received a letter the next day that informed her that her employment was suspended with pay while the district investigated. On July 20, 2016, Esparza received another letter from ECISD that informed her that she was being reassigned from her principal position and would be advised at a later date regarding her employment status.    Esparza was terminated.    She filed suit alleging gender discrimination.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 22, 2019  .. 1st Cir.:  Borges v. El Conquistador  ..  Appellant Nieves-Borges ("Nieves") claims that he was sexually harassed for more than a decade, and thus subjected to a hostile work environment, by the human resources director at the Puerto Rico resort where he worked.    Nieves further asserts that resort managers retaliated against him for complaining about this treatment.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 22, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  FTC v. CBC  ..  Brown is the sole owner and operator of Credit Bureau Center, a credit-monitoring service. (We refer to both collectively as “Brown.”) Brown’s websites used what’s known as a “negative option feature” to attract customers.    The websites offered a “free credit report and score” while obscuring a key detail in much smaller text: that applying for this “free” information automatically enrolled customers in an unspecified $29.94 monthly “membership” subscription.    The subscription was for Brown’s credit-monitoring service, but customers learned this information only when he sent them a letter after they were automatically enrolled.    The Federal Trade Commission eventually took notice. It sued Brown alleging that the websites and referral system violated several consumer-protection statutes.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 22, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  Smith v. DOT  ..  Smith began working as an Emergency Traffic Patrol Minuteman with the Department late in 2013. Minutemen perform various duties related to traffic and roadways. Smith’s employment began with a probationary period starting August 1. To be certified, he had to successfully complete three stages of training over the course of six months. His probationary period did not go well.    According to the Department, Smith was far from a model employee. Early in his training, one of his supervisors reported that he challenged the instructions that he was given, which created a “serious issue” for his training and development. Another supervisor said that Smith regularly “fail[ed] to remember info” and “ha[d] a very hard time following basic instructions.”    Particularly troubling, however, was Smith’s record of unsafe conduct. Once, while driving in an express lane with Marcello Valle, one of his supervisors, Smith approached a place where the lanes divided. Valle told him to pick a lane; instead, Smith stopped short in traffic only thirty feet from the concrete pillar dividing the lanes.    On another occasion, Smith drove away from a gas pump with the nozzle still inserted in the truck. Smith also “almost hit a trooper police car” on a drive with a supervisor.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 21, 2019  ..  The Trump Economy vs. Obama Economy — In 15 Charts :    How does the “Trump economy” compare to Barack Obama’s?     President Trump constantly refers to the economy as “strong,” “terrific” and the “greatest in the history of our country,” but a closer look at the data shows a mixed picture in terms of whether the economy is any better than it was in Obama’s final years. The economy is growing at about the same pace as it did in Obama’s last years, and unemployment, while lower under Trump, has continued a trend that began in 2011.     By Heather Long     washington post

♦       Aug 21, 2019  .. 9th Cir.:  Valtierra v. Medtronic  ..  Plaintiff Jose Valtierra appeals the district court’s judgment in favor of his former employer, Medtronic Inc., in his action under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).    Valtierra claimed that he was terminated on account of his morbid obesity, which the district court held was not a physical impairment under the relevant Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) regulations and interpretative guidance.    He contends on appeal that the district court misinterpreted that guidance.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 21, 2019  .. 6th Cir.:  Siewertsen v. Worthington  ..  Siewertsen has worked at Worthington’s Delta Plant since 1999. The Delta Plant is a steel-processing center where workers manipulate raw steel to customers’ specifications and then ship it to them.    Worthington employees informally trained Siewertsen to operate a forklift in 2000, and Worthington formally certified Siewertsen to drive a forklift in 2004. Worthington recertified Siewertsen several times after that, with the latest coming in 2010.    In early 2011, Worthington sought an expert opinion from David Hoover, the owner and President of Forklift Training Systems, concerning the ability of a deaf person to operate a forklift in Worthington’s plants.    Hoover replied that he did not believe a deaf person could safely operate a forklift in that environment.    Siewertsen filed suit on November 28, 2011, alleging that Worthington illegally discriminated against him on the basis of his disability.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 21, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Jimenez v.  Duke (Homeland)  ..  Mr. Jimenez was born in 1963 in the Dominican Republic.    He began working for the predecessor agency of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”), a component of DHS, in 1996. He is currently an Immigration Officer in USCIS’s Fraud Detection National Security Headquarters based in Washington, DC.    Jimenez’s federal court complaint, which follows three agency EEO complaints filed in 2012, 2015, and 2017, alleges numerous instances of discrimination, retaliation, and harassment. DHS has helpfully numbered these events one through twenty; Jimenez has adopted this numbering convention for purposes of his opposition, and the Court will follow suit.    Jimenez alleged that DHS discriminated against him on the basis of race, national origin, age, and reprisal for prior EEO activity.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 20, 2019  .. 11th Cir.:  Brown v. Synovus  ..  Brown is an African-American man, who, at the time of this lawsuit, conducted internal audits for Synovus.   Synovus hired Brown as a Senior Auditor in 2007. One year later, Synovus promoted him to Audit Manager and assigned Keith Greene as his supervisor. In 2010, Synovus designated Sandra Weekley as Brown’s primary supervisor. Weekley reported to Andy Cottle.    Brown’s employment with Synovus was marked by consistent negative reviews from his supervisors. Even though his initial evaluations of Brown were largely positive, Greene soon began to identify what he considered to be serious problems with Brown’s performance.    Synovus then placed Brown on a 45-day PIP. The PIP, in part, stated that Brown was not meeting minimum expected standards of his job with regard to the quality of his audits and his communications. The PIP required Brown to improve communication, timeliness, and quality of work and sustain acceptable performance after the conclusion of the PIP.    Brown was fired in early 2014. After the [EEOC] issued him a right-to-sue letter, Brown sued Synovus.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 20, 2019  .. 2d Cir.:  Bentley v. AutoZoners  ..  From April 13, 2013, until her discharge on September 17, 2014, plaintiff Rachel Bentley worked for defendant AutoZone as a part-time sales associate in its Wallingford, Connecticut store.   In this diversity action, plaintiff Rachel Bentley sues [AutoZone] for sex discrimination, retaliation, and a sex hostile work environment.   Bentley argues that she adduced sufficient evidence to raise triable issues of fact on the following questions: (1) whether AutoZone’s proffered reason for her discharge—her use of crude language toward a co-worker who disparaged women (and who was also discharged)—was a pretext for sex discrimination and retaliation ...  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 19, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Williams v. Smithsonian  ..  Plaintiff Samuel C. Williams, IV sued his former employer, the Smithsonian Institution, alleging race discrimination and retaliation for protected activity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.    Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, the Smithsonian moves for summary judgment on both claims.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 19, 2019  .. 5th Cir.:  Harville v. Houston  ..  Harville, a white female, was hired as a deputy clerk by the City of Houston, Mississippi in 2005.    She worked in that position for approximately ten years.    In September 2015, the City was facing a budget shortfall and the Board of Aldermen voted unanimously to eliminate the positions and salaries of four City employees, including Harville’s position.    Harville’s claims against the City arise from that termination.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 19, 2019  .. 4th Cir.:  Passaro v. Virginia  ..  Antonio Passaro Jr. is a former Special Agent with the Virginia State Police.   He claims that he faced unlawful discrimination based on his mental disability (post-traumatic stress disorder) and national origin (Italian-American).   He also claims that he was unlawfully fired in retaliation for filing a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”).   This conduct, he claims, violated the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.   He has sued the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Virginia Department of State Police, seeking relief that includes compensatory damages, reinstatement, and back pay.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 19, 2019  .. MCA:  Zyber v. Buick  ..  Plaintiff, Mark Zyber, was employed as a salesperson for a car dealership (Patsy Lou Chevrolet).    In late June 2012, Williamson and White met with Mark Zyber, who at the time was a successful salesperson employed at another dealership, about potential employment at Patsy Lou Chevrolet. Zyber told Williamson and White that he had established a good customer base during his 11 years of employment at his current position, that he was earning a good salary, and that he would have to be sure that a job change would be in the best interests of his family.    During this meeting, Williamson told Zyber that if he accepted employment he could receive a monthly bonus to start, an annual bonus after the first year, a demo car for his wife, and a golf club membership.    He sued defendants after his employment was terminated.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 15, 2019  .. 9th Cir.:  Pizzuto v. Blades   He brutally murdered a woman and her nephew just for the sake of killing.   He subsequently joked and bragged about the killings to friends.   Now, he's fighting his pending execution claiming he's mentally retarded.  ..  COURT DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 15, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  O'Donnell v. Weiner  ..  Patricia O’Donnell shared a desk with her supervisor where she apparently discovered performance evaluations of a couple of her male colleagues in a drawer.    O’Donnell learned that her employer paid her less than her male peers and came to believe that sex-based discrimination explained the pay disparity.    She attempted to raise this issue with several people inside the company, including human resources and the Chief Commercial 0fficer.    After Caine Weiner learned that O’Donnell took other employees’ performance reports without authorization, it suspended her.    Subsequently, Caine Weiner terminated her employment.    Patricia O’Donnell filed suit against her former employer alleging unequal pay due to gender discrimination and retaliation.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 15, 2019  .. MCA:  Sznyr v. Livonia  ..  This case arises out of plaintiffs’ employment with the Livonia Police Department (“LPD”).    Plaintiffs were initially hired by the LPD as police service aids, before being invited to attend the police academy.    Before attending the police academy, plaintiffs signed contracts stating that defendant would pay for the police academy and related expenses, but if plaintiffs resigned from the LPD within four years of completion of the academy, defendant could seek reimbursement for the expenses incurred.    Plaintiffs completed the police academy in November 2014, and submitted notice of their resignations in August 2015.    Defendant filed separate lawsuits in district court against plaintiffs to recover the balances that plaintiffs owed for their police academy expenses pursuant to the contracted agreements.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 14, 2019  .. 10th Cir.:  EEOC v. Centura  ..  When investigating charges of discrimination, the EEOC may obtain evidence that “relates to unlawful employment practices . . . and is relevant to the charge under investigation.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-8(a). The EEOC is authorized to obtain such evidence by issuing a subpoena and seeking a court order enforcing it.    The EEOC exercised those powers when it sought information from Centura, a multi-facility healthcare organization operating primarily in Colorado. Between February 2011 and October 2014, eleven current or former Centura employees, working across eight Colorado locations, filed charges of discrimination with the EEOC.    They alleged that Centura violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) by terminating their employment or refusing to allow them to return to work after medical leave. These employment decisions were allegedly made because of their disabilities or their requests for accommodations.    After receiving the first charge in February 2011, the EEOC requested information from Centura.    Centura responded that the request was overbroad and unduly burdensome.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 14, 2019  .. 3rd Cir.:  Lewis v. UP  ..  This is an employment discrimination appeal arising out of Plaintiff Joseph Lewis’s previous employment with the University of Pennsylvania Police Department.    Lewis suffers from a skin condition, pseudofolliculitis barbae (PFB), which has led to issues giving rise to his discrimination claims.    Lewis raises various issues on appeal.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 14, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  Bilinsky v.  American  ..  American Airlines employed Kimberly Bilinsky for more than two decades.    That employment continued without issue after Bilinsky contracted multiple sclerosis (“MS”) in the late 1990s. American provided a “Work from Home Arrangement” (“WFHA”), which permitted Bilinsky to do her job from her home in Chicago, even though her colleagues operated out of the company headquarters in Dallas.    But after a 2013 merger, American restructured its operations and informally re-purposed Bilinsky’s department. The executives determined that the new duties required the in-person involvement of the employees, so the company rescinded the arrangement and demanded that Bilinsky relocate to Texas to work face-to-face. Once negotiations collapsed, American terminated Bilinsky.    This lawsuit followed.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 13, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Huang v. Pai  ..  Plaintiff Qihui Huang, a former employee of the FCC, brings retaliation and discrimination claims against Ajit Pai, the Chairman of the FCC.    Plaintiff retired from the FCC in January 2016.    And, on December 17, 2018, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit bringing numerous claims and arguing that Defendant discriminated and retaliated against her in various ways dating back to at least 2004.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 13, 2019  .. TAC:  Williams v. AG  ..  Williams alleged in her Original Petition that she is an African American female who began working for the OAG Child Support Division in 1990.    In her deposition, she testified that she started her work with the child support division at the Nederland office, transferred to an office in Austin, then transferred to the Beaumont Office where she worked until 2005. In 2005, she transferred to the Houston office, and she worked in the Houston office until January 2008, when she requested a transfer back to the Nederland or Beaumont office. Shortly before she asked for the transfer back to the Nederland or Beaumont office, her husband had died, and another family member was ill.    The OAG transferred her back to the Nederland office in 2008.    Williams alleged in her Petition that she began reporting to Winton “Jay” Webster, a Caucasian male, in March 2008.    Williams alleged that she personally observed Webster “mistreat minority employees and treat Caucasian employees more favorably.”  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 13, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  Sterlinski v. CBofC  ..  Saint Stanislaus Bishop & Martyr Parish in Chicago hired Stanislaw Sterlinski in 1992 as Director of Music. In 2014 the Parish’s priest (Anthony Dziorek, C.R.) demoted Sterlinski to the job of organist and in 2015 fired him outright.    He contends in this employment- discrimination suit against the Bishop of Chicago that the Parish held his Polish heritage against him.    Until his demotion he could have been fired for any reason, because as Director of Music he held substantial authority over the con- duct of religious services and would have been treated as a “minister” for the purpose of Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC, 565 U.S. 171 (2012), which holds that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does not apply to ministers.    But as organist, Sterlinski says, he was just “robotically playing the music that he was given” and could not be treated as a minister..  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 13, 2019  .. 2d Cir.:  Naumovski v. Norris  ..  In June 2008, Elizabeth Naumovski, a Canadian citizen, began her employment at Binghamton as an assistant coach of its women’s basketball team. During the 2008‐2009 season, Naumovski worked as one of the team’s three assistant coaches under the direction of head coach Nicole Scholl.    In December 2008, rumors began to circulate among student-athletes and their families that Naumovski was engaged in an “inappropriate relationship” with a gay, female student-athlete, identified as “J.W.” Naumovski first learned of these rumors in January 2009, which was about the same time they reached Scholl.    But according to Scholl, the rumors never referred to a sexual relationship between Naumovski and J.W.; rather, they merely suggested that Naumovski was demonstrating “favoritism” toward J.W. Moreover, Scholl claims that she never believed Naumovski was having an intimate or sexual relationship with J.W. Naumovski recalls discussing allegations of an inappropriate sexual relationship with Scholl.    Naumovski further recalls Scholl reassuring her that she did not believe the rumors.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 9, 2019  .. FLRA:  NWSEO v. NOA  ..  A provision in the parties’ 1986 collective-bargaining agreement (CBA) provided that, if negotiations of a successor agreement could not be completed within ninety days and neither party requested the intervention of the Federal and Mediation Conciliation Service (FMCS) or the Federal Service Impasses Panel (FSIP or Panel) during negotiations, either party could terminate all or part of the agreement.    In July 2017, the Agency terminated the parties’ agreement after the parties were unable to agree to the terms of a new agreement within ninety days.    The Union filed a grievance.    Arbitrator Laurence M. Evans determined that the Agency violated the agreement.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 8, 2019  .. 3rd Cir.:  McMullen v. Arcadia  ..  Catherine McMullen brought this case alleging sex discrimination.    Arcadia hired Catherine McMullen as a part-time patrol officer in 2007.    Arcadia hired Joanna Gallagher as the Director of Public Safety in 2014.    The pair worked well together at first.    McMullen helped orient Joanna Gallagher in her new job, and later in 2014, Gallagher recommended to McMullen that she apply for a promotion to the newly created position of Corporal.    Taking Gallagher’s advice, McMullen applied for and received the Corporal position.    Later that year, McMullen applied for another promotion to Sergeant, but despite recommendations from three people in leadership positions, Gallagher and the rest of the interviewing panel awarded the position to a male colleague.    In 2015, Arcadia began disciplining Catherine McMullen and her relationship with Joanna Gallagher soured.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 6, 2019 .. Mike Causey:  WANT MORE INCOME IN RETIREMENT?   MOVE : When they retire, many federal employees in Maryland move to Virginia for a lower state tax, or Delaware where there’s no sales tax. Workers in Vermont move over to New Hampshire to become retirees, while for decades California-based retired feds have moved to Nevada or Washington state, which have no state taxes.    FederalNewsNetwork

♦       Aug 6, 2019  .. 11th Cir.:  Easterling v. Ford  ..  In 2012, Jerry Easterling was driving his 2003 Ford pickup truck, which he had purchased used in 2007, when he hit a patch of ice.    He claims that his seatbelt, which he was wearing, came undone during the crash sequence.    As a result of the accident, he suffered serious injuries and sued Ford for breach of an implied warranty of merchantability.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 6, 2019  .. 3rd Cir.:  Gorgonzola v. OPM  ..  These appeals arise from a long-running dispute over how OPM has handled the annuities of retired nurses who worked for the VA.    Almost nine years ago, five retired VA nurses brought a class action against OPM, alleging that the agency had failed to notify — and recalculate the annuities of — VA nurses who were entitled to an annuity recalculation under a 2002 law.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 6, 2019 .. DOJ OIG:  INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY: FINDINGS OF MISCONDUCT BY THREE DEA SPECIAL AGENTS : The OIG investigation substantiated that one DEA Special Agent violated the DEA Confidential Source policy by serving as the controlling agent for a Confidential Source who was employed with the TSA, even though this Special Agent had a preexisting personal relationship with that Confidential Source as was alleged.    During the course of the investigation, the OIG found that a second DEA Special Agent and a Supervisory Special Agent also violated the DEA Confidential Source policy by approving the establishment of a total of three TSA employees as paid Limited Use Confidential Sources even though the DEA policy precludes such establishment.    DOJ OIG

♦       Aug 6, 2019  .. 6th Cir.:  Hubbell v. FedEx  ..  Sheryl Hubbell worked for Defendant FedEx SmartPost, Inc. (“FedEx”) as a parcel sorter in Belleville, Michigan.    She alleges that her manager told her she should accept a demotion because “females are better suited to administrative roles and males are better suited to leadership roles,” repeatedly disciplined her, then eventually demoted her from her position as lead parcel sorter based on her sex.    She also alleges that FedEx retaliated against her for filing complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and for filing a lawsuit by unfairly disciplining her, not allowing her to earn extra pay by clocking in early or clocking out late, and closely surveilling her.    Eventually, she was fired.    FedEx appeals from the jury verdict finding in favor of Hubbell.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 5, 2019  .. Fed. Cir.:  Bebley v. Air Force  ..  Mr. Bebley was employed by the Department of the Air Force as an Information (Network) Specialist at Joint Base San Antonio, Texas.    On May 11, 2016, Mr. Bebley met with his supervisor to discuss work-related matters. During the meeting, Mr. Bebley became agitated and shouted obscenities at his supervisor for several minutes. Three coworkers in a different office overheard    On September 26, 2016, the Air Force issued a notice of proposed removal, charging Mr. Bebley with conduct unbecoming a federal employee based on the events described above.       Here, Mr. Bebley, appeals a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board sustaining his removal.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 5, 2019 .. DHS OIG:  ALLEGATIONS OF DISCRIMINATION AT ORLANDO AIRPORT : A review by the Office of Inspector General (OIG). Allegations that a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) supervisor at the Orlando airport directed TSA air marshals or other TSA personnel to use behavior detection techniques to racially discriminate against travelers.    This review was requested by members of Congress.    DHS OIG

♦       Aug 5, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Jackson v. DHP  ..  On August 23, 2018, defendant, District Hospital Partners, moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim.    BACKGROUND    Plaintiff, Mr. Jackson, is a Muslim, African-American male who was formerly employed as an orderly, also known as a “float technician,” by George Washington University Hospital (GWUH).    In his three-sentence complaint, plaintiff alleges that he was wrongfully terminated in July 2016:    " I was wrongfully terminated for briefly (10 seconds) raising my voice in relation to being coerced and forced to work on 1 of the only 2 official holidays in the Mulsim [sic] religion, Eid-al-fitr. I routinely worked 64-80 hours weekly and was refuse [sic] my only religious accommodation request in my 3 year tenure. . . . I was unemployed from July 2016-Nov[.] 2017 and seeking lost wages. "    The Court will deny defendant’s motion to dismiss and will allow plaintiff’s claim to move forward.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 2, 2019  .. 5th Cir.:  Gonzalez v. UPS  ..  Gonzalez worked for UPS as a “franchise sales consultant.” This was a full-time desk job, requiring Gonzalez to help service UPS customers. To satisfactorily do this, Gonzalez admitted that he needed to have the cognitive ability to follow directions, adhere to routine, exercise judgment, concentrate, draw upon memory, and make logical conclusions.    In April 2013, Gonzalez took leave from work to have surgery. Perhaps as a result of previous surgeries, he had developed a condition called “complex regional pain syndrome”—manifesting as chronic pain in his right hand. Unlike previous occasions on which he took leave, his recovery period was pro- longed because he and his doctors had difficulty effectively managing his pain.    Approximately nine months into his leave, UPS sent Gonzalez a letter. This letter said two things. First, it informed Gonzalez that UPS had a policy that employees absent for 12 months are administratively terminated. Second, it informed Gonzalez that he could request accommodations for any ADA-covered disabilities.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 1, 2019  .. 5th Cir.:  Hassen v. Ruston  ..  BECAUSE SHE IS BLACK -AND- BECAUSE THEY ARE WHITE ?    LaBrittany Hassen worked at a large hospital called the Northern Louisiana Medical Center as a PRN nurse.    “PRN” stands for “pro re nata”—a Latin phrase, which (roughly translated) means “in the circumstances.”    In other words, PRN nurses are as-needed workers.    Although Hassen had applied for a PRN position, she had also applied for a full-time position. But the hospital interviewed and hired her only as a PRN. This was in February 2012.    On the same day, the hospital hired two full-time nurses with less experience than Hassen. One had no nursing experience; and the other had graduated only one year before with merely a temporary license. Hassen, on the other hand, had graduated from nursing school three years before and had her full license. Even so, all three nurses had the same duties.    The reason for these hiring decisions?    Hassen says that it’s because she’s black, whereas the two full-time nurses are white.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Aug 1, 2019  .. MCA:  Michigan v. Carter  ..  STORY OF A MURDER :    Defendant’s convictions arise from the May 17, 2016 shooting death of Trumaine Walker in Pontiac.    The prosecution’s principal witness testified that defendant and an accomplice approached him and the victim while displaying, respectively, an assault rifle and a handgun.    The witness described defendant as a young black male of light complexion, clean-shaven, and wearing no face covering, and described the other assailant as a tall black male wearing perhaps a ski mask.    According to the witness, defendant forced the victim inside his house briefly, while the other assailant detained the witness at gunpoint outside until a neighbor appeared and started asking questions.    The victim then ran from the house with defendant in pursuit, and defendant shot the victim several times.    Other eyewitnesses described the shooter as a young black male of average height, and one reported that a suspect hurriedly entered the passenger side of a car that then drove away.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 31, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  Smith v. UC  ..  Ms. Smith, a former food-service worker at the University of Chicago Medical Center, sued her previous employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act, [...] for discrimination, retaliation, and a hostile work environment.    In September 2014, Smith gave birth to a daughter and took a six-week leave from work. When she returned to the Medical Center’s kitchen, her workplace performance—which already had been below par—gradually declined.    Throughout 2014 and 2015, Smith received warnings from her supervisors about her “unsatisfactory work performance” and failure to comply with workplace procedures. Incidents often started when Smith disagreed with a co-worker or supervisor and ended with Smith yelling at or threatening that person.    Smith also did not complete her duties on time and violated workplace rules, such as taking breaks without notifying a supervisor and maintaining her workstation in an unacceptable condition.    After counseling from her supervisors, formal warnings, and a suspension, Smith was suspended again and ultimately fired. Her termination letter refers to multiple policy violations including threats of physical violence.    Smith timely filed a Charge of Discrimination with the [EEOC] and, after receiving her right-to-sue letter, filed this suit.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 31, 2019  .. 8th Cir.:  Lacey v. Norac  ..  Ms. Lacey is an African-American woman who started working for Norac, Inc. in April 2014.    Norac is a chemical additive manufacturer headquartered in Azusa, California, with an operating plant in Helena, Arkansas, where Ms. Lacey was employed until December 2014.    Ms. Lacey’s duties at the plant involved “Local Purchasing and HR stuff.”    Ms. Lacey sued employer Norac, Inc. for employment discrimination following her termination.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 30, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  Stepp v. Covance  ..  Covance Central Laboratory Services, a manufacturer of medical test kits, hired Damon Stepp in December 2015 as a temporary assistant in its kit-production department.    Stepp sued his former employer for retaliating against him.    He contests the district court’s entry of summary judgment for Covance, arguing that he submitted evidence sufficient to persuade a jury that Covance refused to hire him permanently in retaliation for his earlier complaints about discrimination.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       FRESH AIR:   THE VINDICATION OF AL FRANKEN:   Journalist Jane Mayer Investigates The Accusations Of Sexual Misconduct That Led Franken To Resign under pressure from the Senate. She's found that the story told by Franken's chief accuser, Leeann Tweeden, is full of holes. Mayer also looked into the accusations against Franken made by seven other women who came forward after Tweeden.    Franken demanded a Senate Ethics Committee review to clear his name.    Senate leaders, McConnel and Schumer, sent Tweedens allegations to the Senate ethics Committee.    New York Senator Kristen Gillibrand (democrat), insisted on Franken resigning before the ethics committee could review the allegations.    Three weeks after Tweeden's accusations, Franken resigned after being pressured by some of his fellow senators led by democrat Kristen Gillibrand.  ..  Read Transcript / Listen To Episode

♦       Jul 29, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  Hunt v. Wal-Mart  ..  Tristana Hunt worked the overnight shift in the electronics department of a Wal-Mart store and Daniel Watson was her supervisor.    After Watson made several unprofessional remarks toward Hunt over a four-month period, Hunt filed a complaint with human resources. WalMart promptly investigated the claims but was unable to substantiate them.    Hunt then filed a complaint in federal court alleging Watson sexually harassed her by creating a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.    At summary judgment, the district court held that Wal-Mart established the Faragher-Ellerth affirmative defense to liability because it reasonably prevented and corrected sexual harassment, and Hunt unreasonably delayed in reporting the harassment.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 29, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  McMillan v. WMATA  ..  In November 1999, WMATA hired Mr. McMillan as an elevator and escalator technician.    After his inquiry into the status and distribution of a bonus owed to another WMATA employee who recruited him to work at WMATA, Mr. McMillan allegedly experienced “negative consequences” for the rest of his career there.    According to him, WMATA denied him career advancement opportunities.    And he observed WMATA exclusively hiring female employees for administrative job openings without regard to time-in-service or time-in-grade.    Mr. McMillan lodged a complaint with WMATA’s Office of Civil Rights, alleging “mismanagement” and “discrimination,”    Between February 2007 and June 2008, Mr. McMillan was involved in at least four separate incidents at WMATA that resulted in disciplinary actions, including a written warning and three suspensions.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       The Coming Mssive Southern Wildfires  .. Mississippi Burning Alabama Burning Georgia Burning South Carolina Burning    California is 32% forested.   With an average of 70% forest cover, the connected southern states of missisippi, alabama, georgia and south carolina are among the most forested states in the united states.   These connected southern states are the most ill prepared states to fight massive california-type forest fires.   They generally have little to no emergency preparedness infrastructure.   They preach low state taxes and consistently declare national emergency in times of need to pimp the federal government and american taxpayers to pay for their own state's emergencies.   Unfortunately, these irresponsible slick-pimp-practices will not work when the massive wildfires reach these criminally ill-prepared states.

♦       Jul 25, 2019  .. FLRA:  Border v. AFGE  ..  Arbitrator Richard N. Block issued an award finding that the Agency violated the parties’ agreement by requiring an employee (the grievant) to undergo medical examinations without a Union representative present.    As a remedy, the Arbitrator ordered the Agency to establish procedures to inform bargaining-unit employees (employees) and independent medical examiners of an employee’s right, under the parties’ agreement, to have a Union representative present during Agency-mandated medical examinations.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 25, 2019  .. N.M.C.C.A.:  U.S. v. King  ..  The appellant was convicted of sexually assaulting KM by entering her room, grabbing and pulling her legs to the side of the bed and penetrating her vu___ with his pe___.    It was dark, and as KM realized what was happening, she asked who was doing this to her. The appellant responded that it was K.M.’s best friend, Gunner’s Mate First Class HG.    Appellant then flipped KM over onto her stomach and penetrated her vu___ with his fingers and then again with his pe___ while he held her arm behind her back ...  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 25, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Chambers v. DCAG  ..  The plaintiff, brings this civil action against the defendant, the District of Columbia (the “District”), alleging that she was unlawfully discriminated against on the basis of her gender and retaliated against for filing a charge of discrimination against the District with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”)  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 25, 2019  .. 6th Cir.:  Kelmendi v. DBOE  ..  Kelmendi served as an administrator and, occasionally, a teacher in Detroit Public Schools (“DPS”).    After he was passed over for a program-supervisor position, Kelmendi complained to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) that DPS did not select him for the position because of his age, sex, and national origin.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 25, 2019  .. 8th Cir.:  Higgins v. UPR  ..  Higgins began working for Union Pacific in 1976 as a Locomotive Engineer.    He was based out of North Platte, Nebraska, and typically worked on trains routed from North Platte to Council Bluffs, Iowa.    Jon Higgins has chronic back pain. He asked his employer, Union Pacific Railroad (“Union Pacific”), to accommodate his back pain by allowing him to take time off “as necessary” and receive “24 hours of rest per shift (between shifts).”    Union Pacific denied his request.    Higgins then sued Union Pacific for, among other things, disparate treatment and failure to accommodate under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 24, 2019  ..  It’s the birthday of Amelia Earhart (1897).    She had been studying medicine when she went to her first air show in California, and it was then that she decided to become a pilot ...    ♦   It was on this day in 1847 that the Mormon leader Brigham Young led his people into the Valley of the Great Salt Lake. He was leading a group of Mormons from Illinois to find a new settlement in the West ...    thewritersalmanac

♦       Jul 24, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Gilliard v. Gruenberg (FDIC)  ..  Ms. Gilliard worked at the FDIC as a Senior Administrative Specialist.    In this lawsuit, Ms. Gilliard asserted that her time at the FDIC was marked by consistent “harassment, discrimination, infliction of severe emotional distress, threats, disparate treatment and more from her supervisors.”    She alleged that she was denied several promotions, lost employment responsibilities, received unfavorable performance reviews, and was exposed to a generally hostile work environment, both because of her race and out of retaliation for submitting claims to the Equal Employment Office (“EEO”).    In an attempt to gather evidence in support of her EEO claims, Ms. Gilliard began to surreptitiously record conversations with two of her former supervisors. Ms. Butler and Mr. Mento eventually learned of the recordings, though, and they ordered Ms. Gilliard to stop—going as far to threaten disciplinary action if she continued.    She therefore filed suit in this Court.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 24, 2019  .. 2d Cir.:  Purcell v. NYIT  ..  Purcell alleges that NYIT discriminated against him based on his homosexuality and mental-health disability. The following facts are taken from Purcell’s amended complaint and must be accepted as true at the pleading stage.    On October 22, 2010, Purcell was unable to take one of his exams because of extreme anxiety caused by a “stalking” situation in his personal life. Purcell sought help from Claire Bryant, one of the deans at NYIT, who suggested that Purcell speak with other faculty and set up a further meeting that included three other NYIT deans and a fourth NYIT faculty member.    During this meeting, Purcell discussed his grades and personal situation, and one of the deans asked Purcell psychiatric questions and other questions about his medical history, and urged him to release his medical records to them.    Purcell was embarrassed by these questions and began crying.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 23, 2019  .. 3rd Cir.:  Saranchuk v. Lello  ..  Appellants are four police officers who worked for the Borough of Dupont, Pennsylvania.    They contend that, because they were members of the local police union, the Borough either terminated their employments or severely cut their hours.    And this retaliation, they say, violated their property interests under the union’s collective bargaining agreement.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 23, 2019  .. CSC:  Wilson v. CNN  ..  Plaintiff Stanley Wilson began working for Cable News Network, Inc. (CNN), in 1996, and wrote and produced stories for the network for more than 17 years.    Wilson filed suit against CNN, Inc., various affiliated corporate entities, and his supervisor. (For simplicity’s sake, we will refer to defendants collectively as CNN.)    Wilson’s complaint contains seven causes of action, six of which challenge CNN’s alleged discrimination and retaliation.    Specifically, Wilson alleges he was denied promotions, given unfavorable assignments, and ultimately fired because of his race and other protected characteristics, as well as in retaliation for exercising his right to make complaints about discrimination and his right to take parental leave.    He further alleges wrongful termination [based on] discrimination and retaliation.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 23, 2019  .. TCA:  Tennessee v. Ward  ..  The Defendant’s ATV ran over the side of a road and tumbled down a steep embankment, and the victim, Ms. Danielle Stahley, was killed when her seat was ejected from the vehicle.    The Defendant entered a guilty plea to reckless homicide. The parties did not have an agreement as to the sentence that would be imposed, but they entered into a stipulation regarding the factual basis for the plea.    According to the stipulation, the accident occurred at 7:35 p.m. on May 27, 2016, as the Defendant was driving the ATV with the victim in the passenger’s seat.    The victim’s father was following in a separate vehicle. At the time of the accident, the Defendant was negotiating a left curve and “moving over [to] the right passing other vehicles.” The Defendant was attempting to avoid a collision with an oncoming vehicle when the ATV’s passenger’s side tires went over the edge of the road. The ATV rolled over multiple times as it tumbled down the cliff and eventually came to rest upside down in a river.    Both occupants were wearing helmets.    The victim’s seat was ejected from the vehicle as it fell down the embankment.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 23, 2019  ..  It was on this day in 1903 that the Ford Motor Company sold its first car, a two-cylinder Model A.    It was sold to a Chicago dentist for $850.    The Model A was painted red, with a seat that fit two people, and no roof.    It reached 28 mph at top speed.    thewritersalmanac

♦       Jul 22, 2019  .. Fed. Cir.:  Smith v. GSA  ..  Mr. Robert Smith worked at the General Services Administration for nearly 30 years before GSA removed him.    Mr. Smith appealed that decision to the Merit Systems Protection Board, asserting that the agency failed to show his actions warranted removal and that the agency had retaliated against him for his repeated disclosure of gross mismanagement and waste.    The Board agreed that Mr. Smith was a whistleblower [but] nevertheless affirmed the agency’s decision.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 22, 2019  .. FLRA:  Navy v. BMTC  .. THE AGENCY'S MISTAKE WAS TO UNILATERALLY REDUCE THE 10 DAY SUSPENSION. ..  The Agency suspended the grievant for ten days on a charge of Conduct Unbecoming a Federal Employee, based on off-duty misconduct while on temporary duty overseas.    The Union grieved the suspension, disputing whether there was misconduct at all and arguing that there was no nexus between the charged misconduct and the efficiency of the service.    The Agency denied the grievance but reduced the suspension to seven days. The Union invoked arbitration.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       July 22, 2019 .. DOI OIG:  NSA CONTRACTOR SENTENCED FOR MASSIVE DATA THEFT : Nine years in prison.    (Four years for good behavior).    NPR

♦       Jul 22, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Edley v. Berryhill (SSA)  ..  The plaintiff, an African American female, was employed by the Social Security Administration (SSA) as a “Supervisory Legal Assistant . . . in the Analytic Review and Oversight Office.” Compl.   The plaintiff alleges that, in 2015, she was diagnosed with an anxiety disorder . . . that impacts her major life activities of thinking, remembering, concentrating, sleeping, eating, . . . caring for herself, and working and causes gastrointestinal disruptions.    The plaintiff contends that   (1) After she disclosed her medical condition to her supervisor, Dale Britton, the SSA failed to engage in the interactive reasonable accommodation process required under the Rehabilitation Act,   (2) that she was denied job opportunities and did not receive awards for high visibility assignments, advancements, or development and support from the Resource Management Office as a supervisor in carrying out her duties,”   and (3) that she “was treated less favorably in the workplace than [one of] her colleague[s].   DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 22, 2019  .. MCA:  Michigan v. Hawkins  ..  The victim participated in a marijuana production operation with Hawkins’s brother, which resulted in financial and other related tensions dating back to 2015.    The victim described a state of “[c]onstant threat” and stated that he left the Detroit area in October 2015 but came back twice, one of those times being on July 22, 2016.    According to the victim, he had returned to Detroit on July 22 for about 12 hours when, at approximately 3:30 p.m., Hawkins kicked in the front door of his house in Detroit and demanded money. The victim called the police, heard glass breaking, then spotted Macauley sitting in the driver’s seat of a vehicle blocking his driveway and pointing a small caliber black handgun at him. The victim further described Hawkins coming “around the house and . . . stabbing [his] tires with a screwdriver or a pick or something to flatten, [or] slash [the] tires.”    Hawkins and Macauley drove away from the victim’s house, but the victim encountered them again a few hours later on a street corner where they threatened his girlfriend with a baseball bat.    According to the victim, Hawkins and Macauley spotted and pursued him. Hawkins aimed a gun at the victim, fired a shot, then retrieved an aluminum baseball bat from the back seat of the car and hit the victim with it before Hawkins and Macauley drove off again.    Soon thereafter, the victim encountered Macauley again, the two exchanged harsh words, Macauley said to his girlfriend, “Baby go get the gun.” She retrieved a gun and gave it to Macauley, who then shot the victim in the left arm.    Hawkins and Macauley were convicted following a joint jury trial. This appeal followed.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 19, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  Pickett v. CTA  ..  In 2015 a passenger on a bus operated by the Chicago Transit Authority screamed at and threatened Lawrence Pickett, the bus driver.    He took six months off from work while recovering.    After his physician concluded that he could return to work (though not as a driver), Pickett appeared one morning and requested a light-duty job.    He was given one by the personnel on duty, but four days later he was told that the CTA was not ready to permit his return to work.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 19, 2019  .. OCA:  Dacres v. Setjo  ..  Plaintiff-appellant Ewan Dacres (“Dacres”) filed suit against his employer, defendant-appellee KIA of Bedford (“KIA”) advancing multiple counts relating to the employment relationship including discrimination and wrongful termination.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 18, 2019  .. FLRA:  Defense v. FEA  ..  The Union filed a grievance challenging the Agency’s suspension of an employee (the grievant). At arbitration, the Agency argued that the grievance was not arbitrable because the Union untimely invoked arbitration.    Arbitrator Vincent C. Longo issued an award finding the grievance procedurally arbitrable and sustaining it on the merits.    The issue before us is whether the Arbitrator’s procedural-arbitrability determination fails to draw its essence from the parties’ agreement.    Because the Union failed to invoke arbitration within the twenty-day timeframe contained in Article 27, Section 1 of the parties’ agreement (Article 27), the Arbitrator’s conclusion that the grievance was procedurally arbitrable conflicts with that article’s plain wording.    Accordingly, the Arbitrator’s procedural-arbitrability determination fails to draw its essence from Article 27, and we vacate the award.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 18, 2019  .. 5th Cir.:  Howard v. St. John  ..  Appellant Joann Howard is a former second grade teacher at the Fifth Ward Elementary School in Louisiana.    Howard alleges that defendants discriminated against her on the basis of her race, that she was subjected to a hostile work environment causing her medical condition, and that she was retaliated against for taking leave and filing an EEOC complaint.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 18, 2019  .. IL App:  Lau v. Abbott  ..  The plaintiff, Anna J. Lau, was hired by Abbott in 1999 as a senior financial analyst, a Grade 16 position. That same year, she completed an MBA. Over the years, she worked in several different areas of Abbott, including the hospital pharmacy, point of sales, and acute care sales and forecasting divisions.    At some point before 2011, Lau became a supervisor for financial analysis, a Grade 17 position.    Lau sued her former employer, the defendant, Abbott Laboratories, alleging that it discriminated against her on the basis of her sex, race, national origin, or age and that it also retaliated against her for complaining about that discrimination.    The trial court granted summary judgment in Abbott’s favor, and she appealed.    We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 17, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Murphy v. DC  ..  Robert Murphy alleges that his former employer, the District of Columbia Department of Corrections, failed to accommodate his disabilities, interfered with his right to medical leave, and then fired him in retaliation.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 17, 2019  .. FLRA:  Air Force v. AFGE  ..  Arbitrator Katherine J. Thomson found that the Air Force violated the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement (CBA) and MOA when it denied official time requests made by the grievant, the Vice President of AFGE, Local 2924.    The Air Force filed exceptions and argued that the award failed to draw its essence from the agreements and is contrary to law.    Because the Arbitrator’s interpretation of the agreements—that an increase in representational activity constituted a special situation under the MOA and that the grievant had provided sufficient information to support the requests—is not irrational, unfounded, implausible, or in manifest disregard of the agreements, we deny the Air Force’s essence exception.    Further, as the Arbitrator interpreted the CBA and MOA and did not interfere with management’s right to assign work, we also deny the Air Force’s contrary-to-law exception.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 17, 2019  .. FLRA:  VA v. NAGE  ..  The grievant worked for many years as a dementia outpatient social worker and admissions coordinator in the VA’s geriatric care facility, Bedford, Massachusetts. The Agency informed the grievant that it was changing her duties to now comprise half-time work in the dementia outpatient clinic and half-time in the home-based primary care program, which required the grievant to travel and treat patients in their homes. She objected and grieved the action.    The Union alleged that the Agency failed to comply with Article 25 of the parties’ agreement. Article 25 concerns details, reassignments, and temporary promotions, and prescribes seniority-based procedures for Agency-initiated reassignments. In an award dated April 24, 2018, the Arbitrator found that the Agency’s actions constituted a reassignment. He expressly rejected the Agency’s claims that it simply changed the grievant’s “functional statement” or job description.    He determined that the Agency changed her position from a full-time position in the outpatient clinic to a “half-time” position in the clinic and a “half-time” position in the home-based treatment program.    He also rejected the Agency’s argument that the new position was related to “some necessary integration” of job responsibilities.    The Arbitrator found that the Agency’s actions were the result of its need to move a supervisor into a position on campus. Article 25 of the parties’ agreement provided that Agency-initiated reassignments would be subject to seniority.    The Arbitrator found that the Agency violated Article 25 when it did not use the procedures.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 16, 2019  .. TAC:  Garriott v. State  ..  This is an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel case.    The underlying offense is DWI. For purposes of this appeal, the evidence and facts are undisputed.    On January 12, 2016, a motorist travelling west on Interstate 10 through Chambers County, Texas observed a truck swerving in and out of its lane, causing other vehicles to veer off the road.    Concerned that the truck might cause an accident, the motorist called 911, reported the truck’s erratic driving, and stayed on the phone with the dispatcher until the truck was pulled over by a State Trooper with the Texas Department of Public Safety.    The trooper had followed the truck for two-to-three miles and decided to pull it over to check on the driver’s condition after observing the truck drift in and out of its lane several times. The trooper later testified that the truck did not “react immediately” to the sirens of the trooper’s vehicle and was “a little slow to stop.”    Once on the shoulder, the trooper identified the driver as Garriott, informed him that the police had received a call regarding his driving, and asked whether he was okay.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 15, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Reinhard v. Homeland  ..  The United States Coast Guard fired Plaintiff Joshua Reinhard following a barrage of misconduct allegations. Reinhard wishes to reverse this course. Believing that he was not given a fair shake, he has spent the last three years fighting the Coast Guard’s administrative separation.    In the present litigation, which is but a cog in the wheel of this broader dispute, Plaintiff has turned to a tool often employed by those vexed by government action: the Freedom of Information Act. Reinhard filed two requests with Defendant Department of Homeland Security — the federal agency that houses the Coast Guard — seeking records concerning his termination.    These documents, he hopes, will reveal material beneficial to his appeal.    In response, DHS turned over more than one thousand pages of records. In addition to this trove, however, it withheld some documents under FOIA’s exemption for information shielded by litigation privileges. Plaintiff challenges those withholdings in this suit.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 15, 2019  .. FLRA:  AFGE v. Immigration  ..  Statement of the Case    In this case, the Authority clarifies how Allen factor (5)—i.e., whether the Agency “knew or should have known” that its action would not be sustained—applies in the context of minor disciplinary actions.    This case is before the Authority on the Union’s exceptions to the Arbitrator's supplemental award, which denied the Union’s request for attorney fees under the Back Pay Act (BPA).    The request for attorney fees followed a merits award in which the Arbitrator sustained the Agency’s charge against the grievant but mitigated the penalty from a fourteen-day suspension to a five-day suspension.    The main issue before the Authority is whether payment of attorney fees is warranted in the interest of justice because the Agency knew or should have known that its original penalty determination would not be upheld.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 15, 2019  .. 2d Cir.:  Legrand v. Walmart  ..  After learning of the racist comments, LeGrand and Mims called Walmart’s corporate office to complain, and Mims complained to Matranga. The abusive and discriminatory conduct thereafter escalated and included a comment by Alles to other Walmart employees that Mims is not LeGrand’s true mother.    Plaintiffs called Walmart’s corporate offices to complain about Alles’s comment and reported the comment to Matranga. After these complaints, Alles told other Walmart employees that LeGrand had had a miscarriage.    LeGrand unsuccessfully requested transfer to another Walmart store. When, in August 2014, LeGrand asked to take Fridays and Saturdays off to attend school, Matranga told LeGrand that her hours could not be changed and “that she would have to either quit school or quit her job.”    Alles explained to another employee that Alles “was not doing anything for [LeGrand] because her mother almost made me lose my job.”    Plaintiffs again called Walmart’s corporate office to complain. Alles then disclosed information about LeGrand’s disability to co‐workers, called Plaintiffs “retarded,” and retaliated by falsely accusing LeGrand of misconduct.    Alles also admitted to a co- worker that she was retaliating against LeGrand because of her complaint to Walmart’s corporate office. LeGrand eventually quit “[a]s a result of this abuse and hostile work environment”—and to attend school.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 11, 2019  .. 3rd Cir.:  Davis v. Postmaster  ..  Jimmy Davis was at all relevant times employed by the United States Postal Service as a tractor trailer operator.    Davis sued the Postmaster General under Title VII, alleging that he was given an “emergency placement for questioning the safety of a trailer.”    Davis claimed that this “emergency placement” was retaliation for EEO complaints he had filed earlier.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 11, 2019  .. FLRA:  AFGE v. VA (Houston) ..  The grievants in this case are housekeepers at the Agency’s hospital who regularly dispose of bio-hazardous waste and clean areas where patients are treated for contagious diseases.    The question before the Arbitrator was whether their exposure to micro-organisms entitles them to environmental-hazard pay.    In this case, the Authority reaffirms our reliance on the factors identified in Allen v. U.S. Postal Service to determine whether attorney fees are warranted in the “interest of justice” under 5 U.S.C. § 7701(g)(1).    However, we clarify that, in arbitration cases where the grieved action is not disciplinary in nature, the “interest of justice” analysis should focus on whether (a) the agency “knew or should have known,” at the time that it denied the grievance, that it would not prevail at arbitration; or (b) prior to the close of the record at arbitration, compelling evidence that the agency’s position was “clearly without merit” made the agency’s prolonging of proceedings blameworthy.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 11, 2019  .. 5th Cir.:  Mandujano v. Pharr  ..  Carlos Mandujano was formerly employed as a deputy fire chief by appellee City of Pharr, Texas (the “City”). In early 2014, the City opened an investigation into Mandujano for sexual harassment, apparently based on letters of complaint submitted by City Fire Marshal Jacob Salinas, Deputy Fire Chief Carlos Arispe, and Assistant Fire Marshal Dagoberto Soto.    The letters reportedly accused Mandujano of sexually harassing a former City employee, Blanca Cortez. Denying that he harassed anyone, Mandujano alleges that Ms. Cortez had told him that he looked like a “pollito” (Spanish for “chick”) and, on two other occasions, had referred to him as a “hot young boss.”    According to Mandujano, he responded to Ms. Cortez’s comments by telling her that he did not like the “pollito” comment and advising her to “be professional.”    In August 2015, the City opened another investigation into Mandujano concerning “the same subject matter as the prior investigation.” Later that month, Mandujano made a complaint to the City Manager “about harassment by two deputy chiefs who were creating a negative and hostile work environment through further statements and commentary by the two individuals in connection with the [February 2014] sexual harassment complaints and continued through the date of [Mandujano’s complaint to the City Manager].”  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 10, 2019  .. Fed. Cir.:  Moore v. DHS  ..  From 1997 through 2016, Ms. Moore held various law enforcement positions at DHS.    In 2007 and 2008, Ms. Moore was serving as an Immigration Enforcement Agent (“IEA”) when DHS initiated two fact-finding inquiries into whether she had failed to follow agency travel procedures on nine separate occasions, and whether she had failed to pay her Government-issued credit card.    Following the two inquiries, DHS determined that Ms. Moore failed to follow agency travel procedures, and failed to pay her Government-issued credit card.    In 2009, DHS commenced a third fact-finding inquiry to determine whether Ms. Moore complied with agency procedures when she provided her firearm to someone who was not employed by the agency.    During the three investigations, DHS documented what they described as a “lack of candor” on two separate occasions.    From June 13, 2008 through August 18, 2014, Ms. Moore was out of the office due to a work-related injury.    In October 2015, DHS notified Ms. Moore of her proposed removal explaining that the “lack of candor” issue was “extremely serious.”    In April 2016, DHS removed Ms. Moore from her position as a Deportation Officer.    DHS notified Ms. Moore that she had the right to contest the Agency Removal Decision.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 10, 2019  .. D.C. Cir.:  Temple v. NLRB  ..  For more than 40 years, the labor relations of the petitioner, Temple University Hospital, were conducted under the jurisdiction of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PLRB).    Since 2006 the Hospital has been in a collective bargaining relationship with Temple Allied Professionals, Pennsylvania Association of Staff Nurses and Allied Professionals (the Union), which represents a unit of its professional and technical employees.    In 2015 the Union petitioned the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to assert jurisdiction over their relationship.    Over the Hospital’s objections, the NLRB asserted jurisdiction and certified the Union as the representative of a larger unit of employees.    The Hospital, however, refused to bargain with the Union in order to contest the NLRB’s jurisdiction and its certification of the bargaining unit.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 9, 2019  .. FLRA:  SSA v AFGE ..  IF THE ESSENTIAL NATURE OF THE GRIEVANCE CONCERNS CLASSIFICATION, THE GRIEVANCE MUST DIE. ..  In this case, we reiterate that the Authority does not have jurisdiction to review a grievance involving classification.    The Union grieved the Agency’s failure to pay the grievant, a term-appointed personal assistant paid at the General Schedule (GS)-5 level, for her alleged performance of higher-graded, GS-8 customer-service-representative duties.    Arbitrator John R. Tucker issued a bench decision that sustained the grievance and, in a subsequent email to the parties, ordered that the grievant “be immediately given a GS-8 rating and be paid retroactively.”    The question before us is whether the award is contrary to law. Because the essential nature of the grievance concerns classification, we find that § 7121(c)(5) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) bars the grievance, and we set aside the award in its entirety.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 8, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  Fields v. BOE  ..  Ms. Fields, a 63-year-old African-American woman, was a teacher with Chicago Public Schools at Edgebrook Elementary School from 2002.    Chad Weiden became the principal of Edgebrook in July 2013, and he required all teachers to submit weekly lesson plans to him. Weiden provided feedback on teachers’ plans during the 2014–15 school year, and he informed Fields that her lesson plans were too scripted and too long.    Weiden also conducted informal observations of teachers, including Fields. He observed often that Fields’s teaching was disconnected from her lesson plans and that students were not engaged with the material.    Weiden suggested ways for her to improve, but Fields incorporated his suggestions sporadically and refused later offers to assist with her lessons.    Based partly on Weiden’s observations, Chicago Public Schools rated Fields’s job performance for the 2013–14 and 2014–15 school years as “developing,” which ranks below a “proficient” rating.       Ms. Fields retired in 2016.    She sued the Chicago Board of Education and the principal of the school where she worked, alleging that they discriminated against her because of her race and age and retaliated against her for filing this lawsuit.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 8, 2019  .. D.C. Cir.:  Brown v. DC  ..  The District funds both nursing-facility-based and community-based care for individuals with physical disabilities. In both settings, individuals are provided with assistance in eating, bathing, toileting and dressing, as well as with their mobility, medication management, meal preparation, money management and telephone use.    The District does not operate nursing facilities itself; it funds care in nursing facilities certified for Medicaid reimbursement through its Medicaid State Plan. There are nineteen Medicaid-certified nursing facilities in the District, which house a total of approximately 2,770 beds.    Plaintiffs are physically disabled individuals in these facilities who have been receiving nursing- facility-based care for more than ninety days but wish to transition—and are capable of transitioning—to community- based care.    This litigation began in late 2010, when four disabled individuals filed a class action against the District, alleging that the District’s failure to transition them to community-based care.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 5, 2019  .. NCA:  Stevens v. Lancaster  ..  Amanda L. Stevens was employed by Lancaster County in two positions: the first at the County Assessor and Register of Deeds Department and the second at the Weed Control Department.    After she was terminated from both positions, she filed an employment discrimination action in the district court for Lancaster County.    She alleged the County discriminated against her based on her gender in her position at the Register of Deeds and retaliated against her in both positions for her opposition to that discrimination.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 5, 2019  .. 9th Cir.:  Mack v. Pinetop  ..  This case arises from the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the Defendants for Plaintiff-Appellant Johnny Mack’s civil lawsuit alleging harassment and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act [...] and for intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”).    Mack is African-American; his wife is Native-American.    The record indicates that Patterson used the “n-word” in the workplace (both around Mack and outside his immediate presence) several times. Davis also admits in his deposition that he used the “n-word” at work between one and five times (including in front of Mack), and that he told racial jokes. Others also heard Davis referring to African Americans as having “monkey blood.”    Mack reported Patterson’s conduct to Patterson’s boss, Pinetop Town Manager Evie Racette.    Shortly after Mack reported the slurs to Racette, Davis decided to pull a “prank” on Mack. No one disputes that Davis knew that Mack is extremely afraid of snakes. Davis captured a snake and told Patterson he would use it to scare Mack.    Other co-workers tried to intervene and convince Davis not to do it.    Davis hid the snake in the passenger seat of Mack’s street sweeper vehicle, next to some window cleaner. Davis asked Mack if he could use the window cleaner, so Mack reached in his hand—and grabbed the snake.    While Mack was having a heart attack, he could hear Davis and Patterson laughing from Patterson’s nearby office.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 5, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Washtech v. Homeland  ..  The plaintiff, the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers (“Washtech”), a collective-bargaining organization representing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (“STEM”) workers, brings this action against the defendants, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), the Secretary of Homeland Security, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”), the Director of ICE, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and the Director of Citizenship and Immigration Services (collectively, the “Government”), challenging    (1) the DHS’s 1992 regulation creating a twelve-month optional practical training (“OPT”) program (the “OPT Program”) for nonimmigrant foreign nationals admitted into the U.S. with an F-1 student visa   and    (2) the DHS’s 2016 regulation permitting eligible F-1 student visa holders with STEM degrees to apply for an extension of their participation in the OPT Program for up to an additional twenty-four months.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 3, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Tillman v. Barr (Justice)  ..  Plaintiff Ms. Tillman was a Budget Analyst at the Dept of Justice for more than five years before her termination.    Plaintiff, an African-American woman, claims that during her tenure she was subject to discrimination on account of race.    Based on her firing, suspensions, denial of pay increase, leave restrictions, and other allegedly adverse actions, Plaintiff asserts that she was subject to  (1)  a hostile work environment,  (2)  disparate treatment on the basis of race, and  (3)  retaliation following complaints to her EEO Office.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 2, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  John Doe v. Purdue   DID PURDUE UNIVERSITY GET CAUGHT RUNNING A MAN-HATING KANGAROO-SEXUAL-ASSAULT-COURT ?   John Doe and Jane Doe were both students in Purdue’s Navy ROTC program. They began dating in the fall of 2015, and between October and December, they had consensual sexual intercourse fifteen to twenty times.     Jane’s behavior became increasingly erratic over the course of that semester, and she told John that she felt hopeless, hated her life, and was contemplating running away.     In December, Jane attempted suicide in front of John, and after that incident, they stopped having sex.     They continued dating, however, until January, when John tried to get Jane help by reporting her suicide attempt to two resident assistants and an advisor.     Jane was upset at John for reporting her, and she distanced herself from him.     In April 2016, which was Sexual Assault Awareness Month. During that month, Purdue University hosted over a dozen events to promote the reporting of sexual assaults.     During the first ten days of April, five students reported sexual assault to the university. Jane Doe was one of them.     Jane Doe alleged that in November 2015, she was sleeping with John Doe in his room when she woke to him groping her over her clothes without her consent.     Jane told the university that John had engaged in other misconduct as well:   she asserted that he had gone through her underwear drawer without her permission, chased her through a hallway while joking about tasering her, gone to her room unannounced after they broke up, and lost his temper in front of her.     John learned about Jane’s accusations in a letter from Katherine Sermersheim, Purdue’s Dean of Students and a Title IX coordinator [she is the alleged purdue-kangaroo-court conductor].   Katherine Sermersheim informed John that the university had elected to pursue Jane’s allegations even though Jane had not filed a formal complaint.          *** Jane Doe neither appeared before the panel nor submitted a written statement. ***      After finding John Doe guilty of sexual violence against Jane Doe, Purdue University suspended him for an academic year and imposed conditions on his readmission. As a result of that decision, John was expelled from the Navy ROTC program, which terminated both his ROTC scholarship and plan to pursue a career in the Navy.     John sued the university and several of its officials, asserting two basic claims. First, he argued that they had violated the Fourteenth Amendment by using constitutionally flawed procedures to determine his guilt or innocence. Second, he argued that Purdue had violated Title IX by imposing a punishment infected by sex bias.     A magistrate judge dismissed John’s suit on the ground that he had failed to state a claim under either theory.     COURT DECISION:   We disagree.     John has adequately alleged violations of both the Fourteenth Amendment and Title IX.    (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 1, 2019  .. 10th Cir.:  EEOC v. Centura  ..  The EEOC is authorized to obtain evidence by issuing a subpoena and seeking a court order enforcing it.     The EEOC sought information from Centura, a multi-facility healthcare organization operating primarily in Colorado. Between February 2011 and October 2014, eleven current or former Centura employees, working across eight Colorado locations, filed charges of discrimination with the EEOC.     They alleged that Centura violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by terminating their employment or refusing to allow them to return to work after medical leave. These employment decisions were allegedly made because of their disabilities or requests for accommodations.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 1, 2019  .. 9th Cir.:  Samson v. Wells Fargo  ..  Patricia Samson announced to her supervisors at Wells Fargo that she would take a medical leave of absence from her position as a portfolio manager to recover from a severe episode of chronic endometriosis.     The next day, Gwin, her supervisor, sent a meeting invitation entitled “Samson Displacement Conversation” to his boss, Stender Sweeney. In the message, Gwin explained that he wanted to “run an idea by [Sweeney] regarding Patricia Samson.” When she returned from her medical leave, Samson was fired.     Samson made out a prima facie case of disability discrimination. Wells Fargo then offered a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for her firing: it says Samson was fired because her position was eliminated in favor of a higher-paying, ostensibly more productive position.     Thus, the question we must decide is whether Samson provided sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that Wells Fargo’s explanation for her firing was untruthful or pretextual.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jul 1, 2019  .. 9th Cir.:  Rodriguez v. Nike  ..  Defendant Nike Retail Services, Inc. (“Nike”) requires its retail employees to undergo “off the clock” exit inspections every time they leave the store.     Seeking compensation for the time spent on these exit inspections, plaintiff Isaac Rodriguez brought a class action on behalf of himself and similarly situated Nike employees.     The District Court granted summary judgment for Nike, holding the Rodriguez’s claims were barred by the federal de minimis doctrine, which precludes recovery for otherwise compensable amounts of time that are small, irregular, or administratively difficult to record.     The California Supreme Court subsequently held that the federal de minimis doctrine does not apply to wage and hour claims brought under California law.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 28, 2019  .. 8th Cir.:  Jane Doe v. Dardanelle School  ..  HOW A BLASEY-FORD TYPE CASE IS HANDLED IN THE REAL WORLD. :   While Jane Doe was a student at Dardanelle School, she claims that another student, R.C., sexually assaulted her at least twice.   The first incident  took place in October 2014 during a kickball game.  While running the bases, R.C. ran into Doe, who was standing on second base. Doe testified that R.C.’s upper arm “bump[ed]” her breast and that he called her a bitch.  Doe said she did not know why R.C. called her a bitch but that she may have been “blocking his way” and that the comment may have been “out of frustration.”     The second incident  took place in October 2015.  Doe and R.C. were seated next to each other while watching a movie with the lights off in a home economics class.  Doe testified that R.C. reached up her shorts and touched the outside of her “private parts.”  After Doe pushed him away, R.C. attempted to force Doe to touch his groin.  Doe pulled her arm away, and R.C. “grabbed” Doe’s breast over her shirt. Doe testified that nobody else at the table at which she and R.C. sat saw or heard what happened.     Doe reported both incidents to Dardanelle administrators, who discussed them with R.C.     Alleging that Dardanelle School was deliberately indifferent, Doe filed a complaint.     Dardanelle School District moved for summary judgment.     HERE   Jane Doe appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Dardanelle School.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 28, 2019  .. 7th Cir.:  Fields v. CBOE  ..  Gloria Fields, a 63-year-old African-American woman, retired in 2016 from her job as a teacher with Chicago Public Schools.     BACKGROUND: Fields was a teacher at Edgebrook Elementary School from 2002 until May 2016, when she retired. Chad Weiden became the principal of Edgebrook in July 2013, and he required all teachers to submit weekly lesson plans to him.     Weiden provided feedback on teachers’ plans during the 2014–15 school year, and he informed Fields that her lesson plans were too scripted and too long. Weiden also conducted informal observations of teachers, including Fields.     She sued the Board of Education and the principal of the school where she worked, alleging that they discriminated against her because of her race and age and retaliated against her for filing this [Age Discrimination] lawsuit.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)


♦       Google And University Of Chicago Face Lawsuit Over Shared Patient Data :     The lawsuit says the university shared timestamps and doctors notes.     engadget.com

♦       NPR LAW SECTION:   SUPREME COURT UPDATES and More Legal Updates :     npr law section

♦       SUPREME COURT:  THIS WEEK AT THE SUPREME COURT :     Supreme Court Of The United States blog     scotusblog.com

♦       Jun 27, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Washington v. Levy  ..  The Court construes the complaint as one raising a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), alleging that Levy Foodservice discriminated against plaintiff by “not making reasonable accommodations to the known physical . . . limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a disability who is an . . . employee[.]” 42 U.S.C. § 12112(b)(5)(A).  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 27, 2019  .. FDCA:  Kmet v. Higgins  ..  The defendant-employer and the defendant-supervisor appeal from the circuit court’s nonfinal order denying the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration of, and stay judicial proceedings on, the plaintiff-employees’ claims.     The defendants argue that the circuit court erred in finding that the plaintiffs’ claims – for discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment in violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act, and for negligent infliction of emotional distress – were outside the scope of the plaintiffs’ arbitration agreement with the employer. According to the defendants, the plaintiffs’ claims fall within the scope of the parties’ arbitration agreement.     Applying de novo review, we agree with the defendants and reverse.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 26, 2019  .. 3rd Cir.:  Baloga v. Pittston  ..  Mike Baloga, a custodian for the Pittston Area School District and vice president of the custodial union, alleges that the District and its maintenance director, Jim Serino, violated his First Amendment rights by retaliating against him based on his union association and related speech.     Treating Baloga’s speech and association claims together, the District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the District and Serino, concluding that Baloga’s activity was not constitutionally protected because it did not implicate a matter of public concern.         Because Baloga has raised a triable issue about whether he was retaliated against based solely on his union association, we will affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 26, 2019  .. FLRA:  NIST v. FOP  ..  Statement of the Case   In this case, we revisit the factors which arbitrators must consider in determining whether a status-quo-ante (SQA) remedy is appropriate. Here, the Arbitrator did not consider the Federal Correctional Institution (FCI)[1] factors when he erroneously determined that an SQA remedy was warranted.     Arbitrator Sean J. Rogers found that the Agency violated the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement when it implemented a senior corporal policy (policy) that entailed additional tasks for the most senior corporal when no supervisor was on shift. He ordered that the Agency rescind the policy and provide the Union with notice and an opportunity to bargain if the Agency were to decide to reintroduce the policy in the future.     In its exceptions, the Agency correctly argues that the Arbitrator erroneously failed to apply the FCI factors when he determined that an SQA remedy was warranted.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 25, 2019 .. GSMArena:  Study finds over 2000 dangerous apps on Google Play Store, some are famous.   While most of the apps have been removed from the Google Play Store, many are still installed on cellphones.    GSMArena.com   read comments too

♦       Jun 25, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Allen v. Mnuchin  ..  Patricia Allen brings this employment discrimination action against Steven Mnuchin, the Secretary of the Treasury, in his official capacity. Ms. Allen alleges that her employer, the United States Bureau of Engraving and Printing (“BEP”), discriminated against her, retaliated against her on the basis of her Equal Employment Opportunity (“EEO”) complaints, unfairly denied her two promotions, and created a hostile work environment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”).  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 25, 2019  .. 6th Cir.:  Harper v. Cleveland  ..  Harper, an African American police officer with the City of Cleveland, filed a civil rights complaint against the City, its Chief of Police, and its Director of Public Safety. Harper claims that the defendants engaged in racial discrimination and that they also retaliated against him for engaging in protected speech.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 24, 2019  .. D.D.C.:  Hall v. Nielsen  ..  Plaintiff Steven Hall has filed a flood of pro se suits against Defendant Rosemary Dettling — his former attorney — as well as other parties, all arising from an employment dispute he had with the Department of Homeland Security. Undeterred by repeated dismissals of his claims, as well as warnings that sanctions would ensue should he continue filing suits, Hall has persisted in initiating claims against Dettling and others. She now seeks a pre-filing injunction against him, arguing that his suits are harassing and frivolous. Agreeing, the Court will issue such an injunction, barring Plaintiff from filing further actions about this issue without prior leave of this Court.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 24, 2019 .. GAO Report:  VA DOESN’T REALLY KNOW HOW WELL VA’S REGIONAL VHA-VISN-OFFICES PERFORM. :   GAO RECOMMENDS THAT VHA :   (1) develop a process to assess the overall performance of VISNs in managing and overseeing medical centers,  (2) establish a comprehensive policy that clearly defines VISN roles and responsibilities for managing and overseeing medical centers and  (3) establish a process to routinely oversee VISN staffing. VHA concurred with the first and third recommendations, and concurred in principle with the second.   GAO Report   gao.gov  (.pdf)     govexec.com   (.html)

♦       Jun 24, 2019  .. FLRA:  NLRB v. NLRB Prof Assn  ..  This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to an award of Arbitrator Elliot H. Shaller filed by the Agency under § 7122(a) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) and part 2425 of the Authority’s Regulations.    The Union filed an opposition to the Agency’s exceptions.    As a preliminary matter, the Authority does not ordinarily consider interlocutory appeals.    Because resolution of the Agency’s exceptions could conclusively determine whether any further arbitral proceedings are required, we grant interlocutory review.    Under § 7122(a) of the Statute, an award is deficient if it is contrary to any law, rule, or regulation, or it is deficient on other grounds similar to those applied by federal courts in private sector labor-management relations.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 24, 2019 .. FLRA:  IRS v. NTEU ..  The parties’ collective-bargaining agreement specifies how they will divide third-party factfinding costs during negotiation impasses.    The Agency has filed an interlocutory exception arguing that the dispute in this case is not a “grievance” under § 7103(a)(9).    Consequently, the Agency contends that the Arbitrator’s denial of its motion to dismiss is contrary to law.    We grant interlocutory review because the Agency’s exception, if meritorious, would obviate the need for further arbitral proceedings.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 21, 2019 .. SUPREME COURT:  THIS WEEK AT THE SUPREME COURT :   SCOTUS blog.com

♦       Jun 21, 2019 .. REPORT:  HOMELAND SECURITY EMPLOYEES AREN’T DISCIPLINED CONSISTENTLY FOR MISCONDUCT :   Lengthy survey by watchdog faults vague definitions, poor record-keeping for the lack of standard consequences across agencies within the department.    Misconduct at the varied agencies within the massive Homeland Security Department—from sexual harassment to discrimination, to absences without leave, to credit card fraud to sleeping on the job—is not being addressed consistently, according to results of a large-scale employee survey released earlier this week.   GovExec (.html)   Report (.pdf)

♦       Jun 21, 2019 .. 5th Cir.:  English v. Perdue ..  Todd English, an employee of the Department of Agriculture, brought claims for sex and age-based discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation against the Secretary of Agriculture in his official capacity.    English’s complaint explained that he is a man over age 40 who, at the relevant time, was employed by the USDA Office of Rural Development’s Single Family Housing Division in Temple, Texas. English alleged that his supervisor, Theresa Jordison, and the state director, Francisco Valentin, discriminated against him based on his age and sex, created a hostile work environment, and retaliated against him after he filed an Equal Employment Opportunity complaint.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 20, 2019 .. DOI OIG:  NPS FORMER OSMRE EMPLOYEE CONVICTED OF BANK FRAUD AND AGGRAVATED IDENTITY THEFT : We found that former OSMRE employee fraudulently obtained nine student loans totaling more than $93,000.    Summary (.html)    Report (.pdf)

♦       Jun 20, 2019 .. DOI OIG:  NPS FACILITY MANAGER STOLE NPS FUNDS, MISUSED A GOV AND CONCEALED CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS : We confirmed allegations that a National Park Service manager stole funds, misused his authority, and concealed convictions to gain employment.    Summary (.html)    Report (.pdf)

♦       Jun 20, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Ingram v. Army  ..  HE GOT AWAY WITH INSUBORDINATION ... THEN HE HAD THE NERVE TO COMPLAIN ..  Harrol Ingram appeals the final decision of [MSPB] denying his request for corrective action related to a Letter Of Reprimand the Army issued to him.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 20, 2019 .. 5th Cir.:  Clark v. Charter  ..  Danielle Clark sues her employer Charter Communications, alleging disability discrimination and harassment, failure to provide reasonable accommodations and to engage in the iterative process regarding such accommodations, and retaliation in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act.       BACKGROUND:   Danielle Clark was employed as a specialist in the Dallas Operations Center beginning in Fall of 2015.    Clark experienced episodes in which she fell asleep, woke up, and did not realize that she had been asleep.    Co-workers found Clark sleeping while she as supposed to be monitoring the network, as well as in the middle of phone calls with technicians in the field.    Clark’s supervisors worked with her to mitigate the effects of narcolepsy on her work.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 20, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  Bowman v. Birmingham ..  Bowman, an African-American man, works as a Business Officer in Birmingham’s Crossplex/Fairgrounds Department, which oversees the City’s sports stadiums and concert facilities.    He complained to his supervisor, Kevin Moore, that a white male coworker, Preston Kirk, had failed to collect several payments owed for catering services. Moore disagreed with Bowman’s take on the situation, declined to discipline Kirk, and tasked Bowman with managing catering payments moving forward.    At that point, Bowman accused Moore of being “quick to discipline the black employees,” while refraining “from disciplining the white employees when they do something wrong.”    According to Bowman, just a few days later, Moore stripped him “of his supervisory duties and authority over the staff in the office that he managed.”    Bowman further alleges that Moore repeatedly reprimanded him and threatened disciplinary action on multiple occasions—all in retaliation.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 19, 2019 .. 9th Cir.:  Rojas v. FAA ..  Jorge Alejandro Rojas (“Rojas”) appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”).    The case concerns a Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) request Rojas submitted to the FAA after the FAA notified him that he was ineligible for an Air Traffic Control Specialist position based on his performance on a screening test called the Biographical Assessment (“BA”).    The BA is an initial screening test that determines whether an applicant possesses certain characteristics empirically shown to predict success in an Air Traffic Control Specialist position. These characteristics include flexibility, risk- tolerance, self-confidence, dependability, resilience, stress tolerance, cooperation, teamwork, and rules application.       We have jurisdiction [...] and we reverse and remand.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 19, 2019 .. D.D.C.:  Santos v. Sessions (Justice) ..  Virna L. Santos is an attorney who served at the Department of Justice, in California, in Bogotá, Colombia, and at Main Justice in Washington, D.C., until September 30, 2014.    In this lawsuit, Ms. Santos alleges that she was retaliated against, harassed, and dismissed because she engaged in protected activity and not because there was a lack of funding for her position.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 18, 2019 .. Supreme Court:  Gamble v. U.S. (Alabama) ..  STATES AND FEDS CAN PROSECUTE SAME OFFENSE WITH NO "DOUBLE JEOPARDY" PROTECTION .. ..  Petitioner Gamble pleaded guilty to a charge of violating Alabama’s felon-in-possession-of-a-firearm statute. Federal prosecutors then indicted him for the same instance of possession under federal law.    Gamble moved to dismiss, arguing that the federal indictment was for “the same offence” as the one at issue in his state conviction, thus exposing him to double jeopardy under the Fifth Amendment.    Gamble pleaded guilty to the federal offense but appealed on double jeopardy grounds.    The Eleventh Circuit affirmed.    The Supreme Court of The United States affirmed.    ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS, BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, KAGAN, and KAVANAUGH, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J., filed a concurring opinion.    GINSBURG, J., and GORSUCH, J., filed dissenting opinions.   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 18, 2019 .. 5th Cir.:  Wallace v. Seton ..  On January 27, 2016, Seton Family of Hospitals (“Seton”) terminated Keneshia Wallace’s employment. Wallace was a Seton employee for a little over six months.    Wallace asserts that she was terminated because of her race and in retaliation for complaining about racial comments directed at her.    Wallace alleges that Linda Brown (“Brown”), her African-American supervisor, directed racial comments towards her regarding her mannerisms and personality. Wallace also alleges that after she spoke with Brown’s supervisor Susanne Cadena (“Cadena”) about these comments, Brown retaliated against her in different ways and ultimately decided to terminate her.    At issue is whether Wallace was terminated based on her race and in retaliation for complaining about Brown’s racial comments and Brown’s acts of retaliation.    For the reasons below, we REVERSE the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Seton and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 18, 2019 .. D.D.C.:  Johnson  v. IAMH&AW ..  Allied originally fired Mr. Johnson in March 2016, but in July 2016 he received an offer to return to work.    After Mr. Johnson returned to work, he had various job performance issues, including a truck accident.    On June 20, 2017, Allied’s HR Director, Michael Baylor, discovered Mr. Johnson nodding at lunch and fired him for sleeping on the job.    Mr. Johnson, who is Hispanic, maintains that his colleague, who is African American, was asleep nearby, but Mr. Baylor took no action against him.       Mr. Johnson appears to make three claims. First, he alleges that Allied discriminated against him based on his race.    Second, Mr. Johnson alleges that Allied terminated him in retaliation for his filing a complaint with the NLRB over his March 2016 termination.    Finally, he alleges that Allied violated the collective bargaining agreement by terminating him without a union representative present and acting outside the disciplinary action plan.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 17, 2019 .. 4th Cir.:  Sweeney v. MSPB (FAA) ..  Sweeney (“Appellant”) began working for the FAA as a developmental air traffic control specialist (“ATCS”). A developmental ATCS must successfully complete extensive training before becoming a certified professional controller (“CPC”).       Sweeney filed a “mixed case” appeal with the Merit Systems Protection Board (“Appellee” or “MSPB”), i.e., a discrimination claim coupled with a challenge to a personnel action decision.    Specifically, Appellant alleged that the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) discriminated against him on the basis of gender and improperly forced him to accept a reassignment that resulted in a reduction in grade and pay.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 17, 2019 .. D.D.C.:  Hudson v. AFGE ..  For several years, Plaintiff Eugene Hudson, Jr. has been locked in a set of disputes with his former employer, the American Federation of Government Employees.    This case concerns alleged racial discrimination in the union’s treatment of Hudson while he served as its National Secretary Treasurer and its decision to terminate him in 2017.    A related, labor-law suit revolves around Plaintiff’s — eventually unsuccessful — bid for the AFGE presidency.    Plaintiff now moves to modify the protective order and for sanctions.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 17, 2019 .. D.C. Cir.:  Mawakana v. UDC ..  In 2006, Mawakana, a black male, was hired by the University of the District of Columbia (“University”) to serve as a law professor at the David A. Clarke School of Law (“Law School”).    Law professor Mawakana was denied tenure and terminated by his employer, the University of the District of Columbia effective August 15, 2013.    Mawakana sued the University’s Board of Trustees, claiming the University discriminated against him based on race and violated both the terms and spirit of its contract with him.    The district court granted the University’s motion for summary judgment as to each count of Mawakana’s complaint.    Mawakana appealed as to three counts.    We now reverse as to those counts.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 17, 2019 .. 3rd Cir.:  Kopko v. LVH ..  Appellant Patti Kopko (“Kopko”) brought this employment discrimination lawsuit against her former employers, Appellees Lehigh Valley Health Network and Lehigh Valley Hospital (collectively “LVH”).    BACKGROUND    In 1991, Kopko began working at LVH.    On April 14, 2009, Kopko received a phone call from her cousin, Ann Bavaria, An employee at a community bank. In particular, Bavaria asked Kopko to provide her with the name of a specialist physician to treat JM for abdominal pain she was experiencing.    Kopko never asked whether JM had expressly authorized their speaking about her medical condition.    Nonetheless, while on the call, Kopko accessed JM’s electronic health records.    A few days later, JM lodged a formal complaint with LVH. An internal investigation by LVH’s information technology security and compliance teams revealed that Kopko was the employee who had accessed JM’s medical records.    Following the investigation, LVH representatives met with Kopko on May 14, 2009.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 14, 2019 .. 7th Cir.:  Mollet  v. Greenfield ..  A BUT-FOR CAUSE OF HIS CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE ? ..  In this case we must decide whether James Mollet’s complaint about a racially charged incident was the but-for cause of his constructive discharge. For the reasons below, we answer in the negative and affirm the decision of the district court.    James Mollet began working as a firefighter for the Greenfield Fire Department in 1995. The Greenfield Fire Department had three eight-hour shifts each day and one battalion chief supervised each.    Mollet rose through the ranks of the fire department and became a battalion chief in 2009.    In November 2011, John Cohn was appointed chief of the department and George Weber assistant chief.    With that we move to the incident that underpins the theory of Mollet’s case.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 14, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Ingram v. Army ..  Mr. Ingram petitions for review of the initial decision of the administrative judge (“AJ”) of the Merit Systems Protection Board.    At all times relevant to this appeal, the agency employed Mr. Ingram as a Computer/Systems Engineer with its Program Executive Office for Simulation in Orlando, Florida. On May 18, 2017, Mr. Ingram filed an Individual Right of Action (“IRA”) appeal with the Board.    In it, he alleged that, in retaliation for protected whistleblowing activity, the agency took certain personnel actions against him. He claimed that these included unfairly low performance appraisals for two consecutive years (2014 and 2015) and moving him from his position as a lead engineer with the Medical Simulation Training Center (“MSTC”) team to a non-lead engineer position with the Veterans Health Administration (“VHA”) projects team.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 14, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Freeman v. Air Force ..  Freeman was hired as an Air Force civilian. At the time of his removal was a Senior General Engineer at the Air Force Research Laboratory.    Freeman had access to a Special Access Program (“SAP”), which contained classified information subject to “safeguarding and access requirements that exceed those normally required for information at the same classification level.”    He was given training in how to protect the classified information accessed in the SAP, and he signed an SAP Indoctrination Agreement attesting to such training.    Freeman was removed from his position based on charges of   (1)   violating security regulations that resulted in the unauthorized release and/or compromise of classified information from the SAP and   (2)   being AWOL.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 13, 2019 .. 4th Cir.:  US v. Lee ..  A federal jury convicted Richard Arlee Champion of conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and aiding and abetting others to do the same.    The district court sentenced Champion to concurrent terms of 262 months’ imprisonment.    On appeal, Champion challenges his convictions.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 13, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Mohammed v. Army ..  The Army hired Ms. Mohammed in 2011 as an assistant professor at the Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center (DLIFLC). Her appointment was temporary, and the Army renewed her contract every six to twelve months.   In 2013, Ms. Mohammed reported her immediate supervisor for “violating rules, wasting government funds, abusing his authority, and committing a prohibited personnel practice.”   She subsequently filed an individual right of action in 2014 alleging that, in retaliation for her disclosures, Hiam Kanbar, the Associate Provost of Undergraduate Education, sent her a letter threatening adverse personnel action.   The Administrative Judge found that the agency had violated the Whistleblower Protection Act and instructed it to rescind the letter.   As to her termination, the Administrative Judge credited agency testimony that it would have terminated Ms. Mohammed regardless of her disclosures because it reduced its teaching program in 2016.   The Administrative Judge also determined that the Army had terminated nonwhistleblower employees.   Ms. Mohammed now appeals.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 13, 2019 .. 7th Cir.:  Nestorovic v. MWC ..  The Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago hired Slobodanka Nestorovic as an assistant civil engineer.    Nestorovic initially did well in the position, but later lost her job for allegedly poor performance.    Nestorovic responded by filing a discrimination charge with the EEOC. She then received permission to sue and brought sex and disability discrimination claims under the Civil Rights Act and the ADA against the Water Reclamation District.    The district court dismissed her case.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 12, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Nelson v. Transportation ..  Nelson was employed in the position of Protective Service Specialist, GS-1801-13, in the Office of Intelligence, Security and Emergency Response (S-60) since about November 2009.    On October 27, 2016, Nelson was interviewed in connection with an investigation into his failure to pay for parking in the DOT underground parking garage.    The investigation revealed that Nelson failed to pay for parking on 455 occasions that resulted in lost parking revenue estimated to be between $4,725 and $5,366.    Nelson was placed on paid administrative leave and his Special Deputation was terminated.    Nelson was suspended for 60-days and demoted to GS-12 grade level.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 12, 2019 .. D.C. Cir.:  Davis v. DC ..  Plaintiffs are 47 former longtime employees, mostly African American, of the District of Columbia Child and Family Services Agency, many of whom successfully served the Agency for decades.    They were terminated as part of a large-scale reduction in force following budget cuts.    Plaintiffs alleged that their firings were unlawfully discriminatory on the basis of age and race.  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 12, 2019 .. 4th Cir.:  Kling v. MoCoMd ..  EQUAL PAY :   I WAS DISCRIMINATED AGAINST BECAUSE I AM A FEMALE. ..  Kling’s complaint did not allege—even in conclusory fashion—that sex discrimination was a cause of the difference in pay between her and Martinez.    Nor could one plausibly infer such discrimination from the bare fact that a higher-paid male employee shared some general job duties with her, when the male employee concededly had a different job classification and worked in an entirely different department of county government.    Martinez’s and Kling’s jobs were not equal.    In sum, although Kling’s work was without doubt important to the County, we conclude that it was not “virtually identical” to Martinez’s work and thus the district court correctly granted summary judgment to the County.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 11, 2019 .. DOJ OIG:  Investigative Summary: Findings of Misconduct by a Senior DEA Official : for Violating Ethics Regulations, DEA Standards of Conduct, and the Federal Acquisition Regulation, and for Lack of Candor; by a Member of the DEA Senior Executive Service for Aiding and Abetting the Senior DEA Official’s Misconduct; and by a JMD Senior IT Manager for Violating DOJ Contractor Security Policy.  justice.gov (.pdf)

♦       Jun 11, 2019 .. 6th Cir.:  Booth v. Nissan ..  After Michael Booth started working at a Nissan factory in Tennessee, he injured his neck and sought medical treatment.    Booth’s physician recommended several work restrictions, including that he not reach above his head or flex his neck too much, but the restrictions did not sideline Booth. Indeed, he continued to work on the assembly line for about a decade without incident.    This appeal concerns two events that occurred about a decade after Booth’s physician recommended the work restrictions: (1) Booth’s requested transfer to a material handling position; and (2) Booth’s transition on the door line from a two-job position to a four-job position.    We consider each event below.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 11, 2019 .. 7th Cir.:  Trujillo v. Rockledge ..  This appeal is about business names and when an employee’s error in naming his employer is or is not fatal to an employment discrimination claim.    Plaintiff Humberto Trujillo worked as a manager of an Ashley Furniture HomeStore near Chicago.    He was fired and then filed a charge with the EEOC alleging age discrimination and retaliation. In the charge, he listed the name of the Illinois store where he had worked — Ashley Furniture. The correct legal name of Trujillo’s employer, however, was Rockledge Furniture LLC, a business that operates several Ashley Furniture HomeStores and that was registered to do business in Illinois under the name “Ashley Furniture HomeStore – Rockledge.”    The district court dismissed Trujillo’s claims [...] because he did not name his employer sufficiently and because the EEOC never managed to notify the correct employer of Trujillo’s charge.    Trujillo filed this appealof the district court dismissal.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 7, 2019 .. FedSmith:  4 EMOTIONS NEW FEDERAL RETIREES MAY EXPERIENCE : Retirement is a big life-changing event. It is a time that provides you with the chance to travel more, spend time with your family, or do nothing at all. However, federal retirement does not come without challenges. In a way, federal retirees experience an emotional roller coaster ride : Excitement, Nervousness, Curiosity, Relief.  by Brandon Christy

♦       Jun 7, 2019 .. FLRA:  Treasury v. NTEU ..  The Union filed a grievance protesting the Agency’s performance evaluation of the grievant. The Agency denied the grievance on April 21, 2016. On May 4, 2016, the Union invoked arbitration by sending a certified letter to the Agency. The Agency sent the Union a response confirming its receipt of the Union’s letter invoking arbitration but indicated that it did not have a record of the case being assigned to an arbitrator.    On December 19, 2016, the Agency sent an email to the Union stating that the time for scheduling the case for arbitration had passed.    Both parties agreed to allow the Arbitrator to decide the arbitrability issue.    At arbitration, the Agency argued that the grievance was not arbitrable because the Union failed to timely schedule a hearing under Article 28 of the parties’ agreement.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 7, 2019 .. D.D.C.:  Stafford v. GWU ..  Jabari Stafford alleges that he was the victim of racial discrimination during his time as a walk-on tennis player at George Washington University.    He brings a bevy of federal- and D.C.- law claims against the University, two of his former coaches, and two administrators in the athletics department.    One of the individual Defendants have moved to dismiss all of Stafford’s claims.    Stafford opposes dismissal and also seeks leave to amend his complaint.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 6, 2019 .. DOJ OIG:  Investigative Summary : Findings of Misconduct by a United States Marshal for Making an Inappropriate Comment about Shooting a Judge and for Lack of Candor ... Justice.gov   (.pdf)

♦       Jun 6, 2019 .. 2d Cir.:  Saber v. DFS ..  The New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) appeals after a jury found DFS liable for discriminating against Nasser Saber based on his national origin when it failed to promote him.    The jury also found that DFS had retaliated against Saber for filing a complaint with the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 6, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Eclarin v. OPM (Navy) ..  Delfin Eclarin was employed by [the Navy] in Subic Bay, Philippines, from August 15, 1957, to April 18, 1963, and then from August 17, 1966, to August 24, 1992. From August 15, 1957, to April 18, 1963, he was employed in an indefinite appointment as a Pumping Plant Operator and then as an Engine & Pump Operator.    On April 18, 1963, he was terminated as part of a reduction in force (RIF) with severance pay.    On August 17, 1966, he was rehired via appointment as a Driver, a position he held on a full-time basis until August 16, 1991, and then on a part-time basis until termination via RIF on August 24, 1992.    The separation notice that issued at Mr. Eclarin’s termination on April 18, 1963, indicated that he served under an indefinite position.       Mr. Eclarin appeals the decision of the MSPB (Board) affirming a determination by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) that he does not qualify for a Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) annuity.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 6, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  Langston v. Lookout MCS ..  Defendant Lookout Mountain Community Services (“Lookout”) provides mental health, addictive diseases, and developmental disabilities services in northwest Georgia.    Lookout hired plaintiff Sherita Langston to be the House Manager for Flintstone, a home for a severely mentally and physically disabled resident. While Langston was employed by Lookout, Jan Lewis was Langston’s supervisor, Janice Sabo was Lookout’s Director of Human Resources, Michael Free was Lookout’s Behavioral Health Director, and Tom Ford was Lookout’s CEO.    Langston earned $26,000 per year based on a 40-hour work week; classified as exempt, she earned no overtime pay. Before the patient’s arrival at Flintstone, Langston worked no more than 40 hours per week, but once the patient moved into Flintstone, Langston had to work longer hours, and she shared her discontent about the lack of overtime pay with her supervisor, Lewis.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 5, 2019 .. 7th Cir.:  Sledge v. Wilkie (DVA) ..  Sledge worked from her position as a nurse practitioner for the VA from 2006 to 2014, first at the Jesse Brown VA Medical Center in Chicago, and then at the Adam Benjamin VA Clinic in Indiana.    In June, the VA notified Sledge that it would terminate her employment, it followed through and fired her.    She has sued the VA Secretary, alleging that she was fired because of her race, age, perceived disability, and for complaining to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission about her supervisors.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun, 2019 ..  VIRGINIA BEACH SHOOTER ... TARGETED CO-WORKERS.    Public buildings full of people, but he only targeted known co-workers.    ???

♦       Jun 4, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  Nurse v. Alpharetta ..  Appellant, an African American man, was fired from his job as a police officer with the City of Alpharetta following an internal affairs investigation of a misconduct complaint.    He now sues the City and five individually named defendants (officials of the City and the police department) claiming race discrimination in violation of Title VII and the Equal Protection Clause, as well as a violation of his due process rights embodied in the Fourteenth Amendment.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 4, 2019 .. Supreme Court:  Fort Bend v. Davis ..  In Davis, the Fifth Circuit held that Title VII’s exhaustion requirement is a claim-processing rule subject to waiver or other equitable exceptions, “not a jurisdictional bar to suit but rather a prudential prerequisite.”   As the employer in the action had not timely argued that the plaintiff had failed to fully exhaust her administrative remedies, the Fifth Circuit found the legal issue waived.   If the Supreme Court affirms the Fifth Circuit’s holding, litigants may be able to pursue employment discrimination lawsuit even if they have not fully exhausted their administrative remedies, if equitable grounds support waiver.   On the other hand, if the Supreme Court overturns the Fifth Circuit’s ruling, any defect in the administrative process will be found to jurisdictionally bar a subsequent lawsuit.     The Supreme Court unanimously 9-0 affirmed the Fifth Circuit’s holding.   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 3, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  Jones v. RS&H ..  RS&H is a multi-discipline design firm that provides fully integrated architecture, engineering, and consulting services. The firm is organized into five divisions, which are Aerospace, Aviation, Corporate, Transportation, and Transportation Construction Management.    All three plaintiffs worked at RSH’s offices in Tampa in the Transportation division.    In this “collective action” under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), Bradley Jones, Paula Taylor, and Hamid Ashtari allege that their former employer, RSH, discriminated against them on the basis of age when it terminated them as part of a reduction in force (“RIF”).  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 3, 2019 .. FLRA:  SSA v. AALJ ..  Under the SSA telework policy, an Agency “approving official . . . may authorize work at home . . . as temporary telework for medical reasons for employees, who because of medical reasons, certified by a health care provider, have difficulty commuting to the worksite but are able to perform the duties of their position at home.”    The grievant, an ALJ, requested to work from home after his back surgery.    On March 29, 2017, SSA denied the telework request.    In response, the grievant filed a grievance.    SSA denied the grievance because the final doctor’s note did not definitively state that the grievant could perform a full range of his duties at home.    The Union invoked arbitration. ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 3, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  Siddiqui v. Netjets ..  Ameer Siddiqui appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of his former employer, NetJets Aviation, Inc. First, Siddiqui, a Muslim of Pakistani descent, argues that the district court erred in granting summary judgment for NetJets on his discrimination claims under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1) and 42 U.S.C. § 1981, based on its finding that he failed to show that NetJets’s proffered reasons for placing him on administrative leave, unreasonably extending that leave, and ultimately terminating him were pretexts for discrimination.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Jun 3, 2019 .. FLRA:  DVA v. AFGE ..  In this case, the Arbitrator made an error about an undisputed fact. As such, we set aside the portion of the award that flows from that error.    On several occasions, Union officials were unable to locate emails that they had stored in an Agency-provided electronic records system. Arbitrator William H. Mills issued an award finding that the Agency violated multiple provisions of the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement by failing to provide the Union with the type of electronic records system described in the parties’ agreement.    The question before us is whether the award is based on nonfacts.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 31, 2019 .. FLRA:  Defense v. AFGE ..  In this case, we must determine whether a grievance impermissibly involves classification under § 7121(c)(5) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute).    We determine that it does.    In an interim award, Arbitrator Trudi Ferguson determined that the grievance could proceed to a merits hearing because the arbitration could avoid classification issues.    The main question before us is whether that determination is contrary to law. Because the essential nature of the grievance concerns classification, regardless of how the Arbitrator characterized it, we find that § 7121(c)(5) bars the grievance, and we set aside the interim award.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 31, 2019 .. FSIP:  SSA v. AFGE ..  This case, filed by the Social Security Administration (Management or Agency) on January 10, 2019, concerns a dispute over parts of 12 articles in the parties’ successor collective-bargaining agreement (CBA) between it and the American Federation of Government Employees (Union).    This dispute was filed pursuant to §7119 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute).  ..  (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 30, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Borza v. Commerce ..  THE ARBITRATOR IMPOSED A 561-DAY SUSPENSION.  ..  Ms. Borza began working at the U.S. Census Bureau in 1998, initially as a typist and then as a Management Analyst. On December 15, 2013, the U.S. Office of the Inspector General received an anonymous complaint that several employees, including Ms. Borza, were regularly claiming time and receiving pay for hours they had not worked. Consequently, in February 2014, the Census Bureau initiated an investigation into the matter. It determined that Ms. Borza received pay for more than 900 hours of unperformed work beginning on January 4, 2010, and amounting to about $40,000 in gross income.    Accordingly, Ms. Borza was placed on administrative leave in May 2015, then terminated, effective September 9, 2016. Although her union filed a grievance challenging the termination, the agency ultimately decided to maintain its position. Thus, Ms. Borza, through her union, requested arbitration under the collective bargaining agreement.    Teresa L. Borza petitions for review of an arbitrator’s decision imposing a 561-day suspension. Because the arbitrator failed to justify the length of suspension, we vacate-in-part the arbitrator’s decision and remand for further consideration.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May30, 2019 .. 4th Cir.:  Alford v. MSPB ..  Mia C. Alford petitions for review of the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board’s (“MSPB”) 2016 decision dismissing as barred by the doctrine of laches Alford’s appeal of her 1996 termination of employment from the Drug Enforcement Administration.    For cases, like this one, that include at least one claim that the employer violated a federal antidiscrimination statute, petitions for review of an MSPB decision must be made to the appropriate district court.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 29, 2019 .. 6th Cir.:  Crawford v. Chipotle ..  Alashae Crawford was fired from a supervisor position at a Chipotle Mexican Grill in southwestern Ohio. She then filed this lawsuit, alleging that Chipotle had violated federal and Ohio law by terminating her because of her race and because she had accused her manager of race discrimination.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 29, 2019 .. 4th Cir.:  Alford v. MSPB ..  Mia C. Alford petitions for review of the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board’s (“MSPB”) 2016 decision dismissing as barred by the doctrine of laches Alford’s appeal of her 1996 termination of employment from the Drug Enforcement Administration. For cases, like this one, that include at least one claim that the employer violated a federal antidiscrimination statute, petitions for review of an MSPB decision must be made to the appropriate district court.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 28, 2019 .. SUPREME COURT:  Box v. PlanedParenthood ..  WOMEN MUST BURY OR CREMATE BODY AFTER THEY KILL/MURDER/ABORT UNBORN BABY.  ..  The Seventh Circuit found Indiana’s disposition law invalid.    It held that Indiana’s stated interest in “the ‘humane and dignified disposal of human remains’ ” was “not . . . legitimate.”     SUPREME COURT:   We now reverse that determination.    (.pdf)    (.html)

♦       May 28, 2019 .. FLRA:  IBEW v. GPO ..  The grievant is a sheet-metal mechanic.    In January 2015, the Agency’s IG received an anonymous tip that someone had constructed a grill or a smoker for personal use out of Agency materials.    In July 2015, the IG issued an investigative report which identified the mechanic who had constructed the grill.    In the course of the investigation, the grievant was interviewed and denied knowing about the other mechanic’s actions, even though he supplied him with the high-temperature paint used on the grill.    The mechanic who constructed the grill was suspended for seven days for his actions; the grievant was suspended for fourteen days for lack of candor, misuse of government property, and failure to follow applicable rules, laws, [regs], or policies in the performance of duties.    The Union grieved and the dispute was arbitrated.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 28, 2019 .. N.M.C.C.A.:  U.S. v. Armendariz ..  SHE WENT FROM "THE MILITARY SEDUCTRESS" ... TO "THE MILITARY VICTIM" ..  The appellant was convicted, contrary to his pleas, of two specifications of violating a lawful general regulation, one specification of sexual assault by bodily harm, one specification of sexual contact by bodily harm, and one specification of adultery.    On 25 July 2016, before 0800, Ms. Sergeant N texted the appellant asking “Are you alive?!” and noted that she had not seen the appellant for about a week.    The appellant texted and then called Ms. Sergeant N. During that call, Ms. Sergeant N asked the appellant if he would roll the sleeves on her uniform blouse because she did not want to do so. The appellant agreed. He met Ms. Sergeant N outside of the squadron building where he had a private office.    Ms. Sergeant N and the appellant also talked about a time they had had consensual sex years ago during their prior tour together. In response to the appellant’s reference to their prior consensual sexual encounter, Ms. Sergeant N laughed, said she remembered.    Ms. Sergeant N testified that the appellant locked the office door and turned off the lights. Then he laid her back on his couch and pushed aside her shorts, the liner of her shorts, and her underwear.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 24, 2019 .. 6th Cir.:  Rogers v. Webstaurant ..  Brittany Rogers filed suit against the Webstaurant Store for allegedly retaliating against her after she sought overtime pay. The district court dismissed her suit, and we affirm.    Brittany Rogers worked as a customer service representative for the Webstaurant Store. The main goal of customer service is to provide helpful and friendly service to customers. But Rogers’s manager, Tricia Wilkerson, believed that Rogers lacked a “can do attitude towards helping customers.”    Webstaurant decided it was best to cut ties with Rogers and let her go.    Rogers did not believe Webstaurant fired her for performance reasons. Instead, she believed that Webstaurant fired her because she complained about not getting overtime pay. So she filed suit under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 24, 2019 .. 5th Cir.:  Inocencio v. Montalvo ..  Inocencio, a Hispanic man, was employed by the Houston Police Department (HPD) from 1982 until his retirement in 2014.    Inocencio was promoted to the rank of Sergeant in 1992. In 2004, Inocencio was promoted to Lieutenant and assigned to the Narcotics Division, where he remained for the duration of his career until he retired.    Inocencio alleges that the Narcotics Division had a long-standing policy of promoting into HIDTA positions only officers who had first worked in the street-level units within that division. Inocencio also maintains that he was highly qualified for the HIDTA positions, claiming that he led the “most productive” squad in General Narcotics and achieved high productivity by cultivating and managing about 60 confidential informants.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 24, 2019 .. FLRA:  Defense v. ACEA ..  The Federal Labor Relations Authority’s (FLRA’s) Boston Regional Office issued an unfair-labor-practice (ULP) complaint alleging that the Respondent (the Agency) violated § 7116(a)(1), (5), and (6) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute).    The complaint alleged that the Agency committed ULPs when it refused to implement a successor collective-bargaining agreement with the Charging Party (the Union), despite a decision from the Federal Service Impasses Panel (the Panel) directing the Agency to adopt that agreement.    In the attached decision, an FLRA Administrative Law Judge (the Judge) recommended finding that the Agency committed the ULPs alleged in the complaint.      The main issue before us is whether the Judge’s recommended decision is contrary to law.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 23, 2019 .. 4th Cir.:  Westmoreland v. TWC ..  After Time Warner Cable (“TWC”), fired Glenda Westmoreland, an African American woman, she filed this action, alleging that the company would not have done so but for illegal age discrimination.    Following a three-day trial, the jury found for Westmoreland, and the district court denied TWC’s motion for judgment as a matter of law.    TWC now brings this appeal, principally contending that Westmoreland failed to present sufficient evidence to justify the jury verdict.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 23, 2019 .. 5th Cir.:  Herring v. AP&J ..  Charles Herring sued NewFirst National Bank (which he inaccurately calls NewFirst State Bank) and certain individuals for race discrimination under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and state-law theories.  ..  The district court converted the motion to dismiss to a motion for summary judgment and granted summary judgment.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 22, 2019 .. 2d Cir.:  Massaro  v. Education ..  Ms. Massaro, a former public school teacher of the New York City Department of Education (“DOE”).    She alleged that school personnel violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) by discriminating against her on the basis of her age and retaliating against her for bringing an earlier age‐discrimination lawsuit.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 22, 2019 .. D.D.C..:  Varnado v. Save the Children ..  Save the Children hired Ms. Varnado, who is African American, to be an Associate Director of Financial and Sub-Award Management within USP Finance. During her first performance review, Ms. Varnado received positive feedback from her supervisor, Juliana Brannan.    The next month, a finance manager on Ms. Varnado’s team gave notice, and Save the Children tried to hire someone temporarily to cover that manager’s immediate responsibilities. When that proved difficult, Ms. Varnado offered to take on the role to learn more about it, and she moved to Lexington, Kentucky, to do so. Upon arrival, she received training from another finance manager about the role.    Even in Ms. Varnado’s telling, this arrangement was not a happy one. First, Ms. Varnado was late to a conference call about her finance manager responsibilities. Then, she had issues using a risk assessment tool. Ultimately Save the Children fired her.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 21, 2019 .. DOJ OIG:    FCC CHIEF ENDORSES SPRINT, T-MOBILE MERGER : FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said in a press release. "The commitments made today by T-Mobile and Sprint would substantially advance each of these critical objectives."    To secure the deal, Sprint agreed to sell Boost Mobile. Sprint will retain Virgin Mobile and T-Mobile will retain Metro by T-Mobile. ... nbcnews.com

♦       May 21, 2019 .. WCA:  Hollis v. Snohomish ..  Deborah Hollis appeals the summary judgment dismissal of her claims against her former employer, the Snohomish County Medical Examiner's Office(SCMEO),for retaliation, disability discrimination, and failure to accommodate her disabilities.    Hollis suffers from diabetes. In December 2013, Hollis requested a workplace accommodation for her diabetes and met with Heather Ole, SCMEO's operations manager. Hollis asked Oie for new boots, a refrigerator to keep her lunch in, and the ability to take breaks as necessary.    The day after the meeting, Hollis purchased the boots on SCMEO's credit card and Dr. Thiersch purchased a personal refrigerator for Hollis's work space. Ole advised Hollis that she could take breaks to manage her condition at any time and asked Hollis to notify her if she had any trouble taking those breaks. After this initial meeting, Hollis never contacted Ole to inform her that there were any issues with the accommodations.    In August 2015, Hollis complained to Dr. Daniel Selove, the chief medical examiner hired in 2015, that she was not able to take her lunch breaks.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 20, 2019 .. FLRA:  SSA v. IFPTE ..  On December 14, 2016, the grievant received a favorable settlement on an EEO complaint she filed against the Agency. Two days later, the Agency informed the grievant that it was investigating her for conduct that had occurred in May 2016.    In March, 2017, the grievant filed a formal complaint with the EEO (second complaint) against the Agency alleging retaliation for the grievant’s first EEO complaint.    Following the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency issued a written reprimand to the grievant in May 2017. In response, the Union filed a grievance on June 29, 2017 on her behalf, alleging that the Agency violated the parties’ agreement and did not have just cause to issue a written reprimand.    The parties were unable to resolve the grievance, and it proceeded to arbitration.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 20, 2019 .. 9th Cir.:  Lambert v. Tesla ..  Plaintiff-Appellant DeWitt Lambert filed suit against Defendant-Appellee Tesla, Inc. (Tesla), alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1981.    Tesla moved to compel arbitration, and the district court granted the motion.    Lambert appealed, arguing that § 1981 claims cannot be subjected to compulsory arbitration.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 20, 2019 .. D.C. Cir.:  Haynes v. DC Water ..  Larry Haynes had worked at the D.C. Water and Sewer Authority (“D.C. Water”) for nearly thirty years when his position was eliminated as part of a reorganization. D.C. Water offered Haynes a new position, but he was unable to obtain the license that position required and lost his job.    Haynes alleges that he was treated differently than other employees affected by the reorganization due to his race, age, and learning disability, and that D.C. Water refused to accommodate his disability when it set deadlines for him to obtain the new license. He brings claims under various federal and D.C. civil rights statutes.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 17, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  Stanley v. Broward ..  Plaintiff-Appellant Jeffrey Stanley has alleged that the Defendant-Appellee Broward County Sheriff’s Office refused to rehire him due to his political activities in violation of the First Amendment.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 17, 2019 .. 4th Cir.:  Dortch v. Cellco ..  Frieda Dortch contends that the district court erred in rejecting her hostile work environment claim by concluding that the alleged harassment was not severe or pervasive and in finding that Verizon was not on notice of the harassment.    To establish a hostile work environment claim, “a plaintiff must show that the offending conduct (1) was unwelcome, (2) was because of her [race or] sex, (3) was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of her employment and create an abusive working environment, and (4) was imputable to her employer.”    Harassment is considered sufficiently severe or pervasive so as to alter the terms or conditions of the employment if a workplace is “permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult.”    The standard for proving an abusive work environment is intended to be a high one because it is designed to “filter out complaints attacking the ordinary tribulations of the workplace.”    Thus, the plaintiff must show not only that she subjectively believed her workplace environment was hostile, but also that a reasonable person could perceive it to be objectively hostile.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 16, 2019 .. DOJ OIG:  Investigative Summary : Misconduct by an FBI Attorney for Shoplifting at Quantico Marine Base ... Justice.gov   (.pdf)

♦       May 16, 2019 .. FLRA:  Army v. AFGE ..  The Union president (the grievant) requested sixty-four hours of official time. On the request form, the grievant listed Section A.4, and generally referenced Subsections (a), (b), (c), (e), and (f) as the reasons for the official time, but did not specify how much time he needed for each activity.    While reviewing the request, the grievant’s supervisor orally asked the grievant for additional information about the activities that the grievant would perform so that the supervisor could determine whether the amount of time requested was reasonable.    When the grievant refused to provide any additional information, the Agency denied the request on the basis that the grievant requested an “excessive amount of time” without providing enough detail for management to determine how he would use the time.    The Union filed a grievance over the denial.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 16, 2019 .. 7th Cir.:  U.S. v. Sanchez ..  Sanchez, a daily cocaine user, says that on the day of his arrest he had decided to take his own life. He took a gun from his closet and ingested multiple controlled substances.    Galesburg, Illinois police officers responded to a call about an intoxicated person on the street and encountered Sanchez, attempting (and failing) to stay upright, with the handle of the gun protruding from his pocket.    The officers handcuffed Sanchez and discovered that the gun was loaded and that its serial number had been removed.    In the same pocket, they also found a plastic bag containing three baggies of cocaine weighing 4.8 grams total.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 15, 2019 .. 4th Cir.:  Chin-Young  v. U.S. ..  Chin-Young appeals the district court’s dismissal of his tort, discrimination, and various statutory claims on grounds of res judicata.    Chin-Young was terminated from his position as a civilian Supervisory Program Analyst in the Army Contracting Command (the “ACC”) in Fort Belvoir, Virginia in January 2011. He challenged his termination before the Merit Systems Protection Board (the “MSPB”) and he settled his initial challenge in May 2011.    He has subsequently brought three petitions to enforce the settlement agreement, resulting in two decisions by the MSPB, both of which he has appealed to federal district court. His second appeal is before us now.    For the reasons that follow, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 13, 2019 .. SUPREME COURT:  Apple. v. Pepper ..  SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST APPLE IN APP STORE PRICE FIXING CASE ..  The proposed class action lawsuit by consumers accuses Apple Inc of monopolizing the market for iPhone software applications and forcing them to overpay.    Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh, an appointee of President Donald Trump, joined the court’s four liberal justices to rule against Apple in a 5-4 ruling.   (reuters)    (wiki)

♦       May 13, 2019 .. D.C. Cir.:  Figueroa v. Michael Pompeo ..  Figueroa is a Hispanic male born in Puerto Rico.    Relevant here, federal employees may invoke two theories to prove Title VII liability. First, under the disparate impact theory, employees may challenge the government’s use of a “particular employment practice that causes a disparate impact on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”    Second, under the disparate treatment theory, they may challenge any “personnel actions affecting employees” and involving “any discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.” Such actions include hiring, firing, and the provision of “compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment.”  ..  DECISION:  (pdf)   (html)

♦       May 13, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  Carpenter v. Alabama ..  Dr. John Carpenter, Jr., a physician who previously held a staff position with the University of Alabama Health Services Foundation (“UAHSF”) and a tenured faculty position at University of Alabama at Birmingham’s (“UAB”) School of Medicine, brought a § 1983 claim against UAHSF, alleging a violation of his property interest in continued employment in both positions when he was wrongfully discharged without a pre-termination hearing.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 13, 2019 .. 7th Cir.:  Tomas v. Illinois ..  Susan Tomas, who is white and Polish, sued the Illinois Department of Employment Security and its employees under Title VII and the Fourteenth Amendment after she was passed over for a promotion. She also asserted that the defendants retaliated against her for filing a discrimination charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.    Lastly, she brought discrimination and retaliation claims against both her union—the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Local 1006—and union officials for inadequately investigating her allegations and declining to file grievances on her behalf.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 10, 2019 .. 3rd Cir.:  Smith v. Scranton ..  SHE IS NOT A POOR PERFORMER,  SHE IS A "VICTIM" ??? ..  University of Scranton hired Smith to work as a receptionist in its Residential Life Office.    Smith had a rough tenure: she received several poor performance reviews and two warnings about the quality of her work.    A few weeks after the second warning, Smith told her supervisor that she was having “trouble with [her] memory” and suffering from “daily headaches.”    So in 2012, Smith asked for two accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act.    Soon after, Smith accepted a secretary position in the University’s Department of Theology and Religious Studies.    But Smith's performance remained spotty: She had trouble printing, scanning, and copying documents. She made mistakes filling out expense reports and reimbursements.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 10, 2019 .. A.F.C.C.A.:  U.S. v. Bello ..  On 4 June 2017, Appellant was at a bar near Malmstrom Air Force Base (AFB), Montana.    At some point during the evening, Appellant left the bar and was standing outside with his friends as Senior Airman (SrA) WG was entering the bar.    Appellant said something to a person who was with SrA WG, and Appellant and SrA WG exchanged words.    As the verbal confrontation escalated, Appellant and SrA WG moved very close to each other, and Appellant ultimately punched SrA WG twice in the face.    SrA WG fell to the ground, striking his head on the pavement and sustaining a skull fracture and subdural hemorrhage.    Security camera footage showed that, prior to the fight, Appellant reached into his pants pocket, retrieved a cell phone, and handed it to a female who was watching the events unfold.    She appeared to record or photograph the fight with the phone.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 10, 2019 .. Fed Cir.:  Broughton v. U.S. ..  Ms. Broughton was honorably discharged from the United States Navy and the Naval Reserve in 1997.    From 2005 through 2009, she worked for the Department of Veterans Affairs at medical centers in Denver, Colorado, and Seattle, Washington.    She alleges that exposure to hazardous waste odors during her employment caused her to suffer from hypoxia.    She ultimately resigned in May 2009 after the VA denied her requests for accommodation.    Since her resignation, Ms. Broughton has started several legal proceedings related to her work environment, including before the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the [court].   COURT DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 9, 2019 .. 6th Cir.:  Fowler v. Benson ..  SHAME ON YOU SIXTH CIRCUIT, SHAME ON YOU ..  This is a case about the constitutionality of Michigan’s driver’s-license suspension scheme, as applied to indigent drivers. Plaintiffs claim that the Michigan Secretary of State’s suspension of an indigent person’s driver’s license, on the basis of unpaid court debt, violates the Fourteenth Amendment.    Plaintiffs contend that suspending the driver’s licenses of the poor is irrational because license suspension makes their commuting to and from work, for instance, much harder, and therefore reduces the chances that they will pay the debt.    Because Plaintiffs have not shown that Michigan’s legal scheme is devoid of a rational basis, we decline Plaintiffs’ invitation to etch their preferred driver’s-license policy into constitutional bedrock.    The district court granted Plaintiffs’ motion to enjoin Michigan’s Secretary of State from enforcing Michigan’s driver’s-license suspension law.    Because we find that the Secretary’s enforcement of Michigan law does not run afoul of the Fourteenth Amendment, we REVERSE.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 9, 2019 .. 7th Cir.:  Levitin v. Northwest ..  Dr. Yelena Levitin is a female, Jewish surgeon of Russian descent. She owns and operates Chicago Surgical Clinic, Ltd., a private medical practice. From 2000 through early 2013, most of her revenue came from the work she performed at Northwest Community Hospital in Arlington Heights, Illinois., where she maintained practice privileges.    In December 2008 Levitin complained to Northwest that Dr. Daniel Conway, another surgeon, was harassing her. She alleges that Conway repeatedly criticized her medical decisions, undermined her in front of her patients, and interrupted one of her surgeries. Northwest reprimanded Conway, and any direct harassment stopped in January 2009.    For nearly thirteen years, Dr. Yelena Levitin performed surgeries at Northwest. In January 2013 the hospital terminated her practice privileges.    She brought this Title VII suit claiming that Northwest discriminated against her based on her sex, religion (Jewish), and ethnicity (Russian).  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 9, 2019 ..  ARMY CHANGES PROMOTION RULES TO FACILITATE A FLOOD OF PROMOTIONS OF UN-QUALIFIED SOLDIERS OVER FULLY-QUALIFIED SOLDIERS.  ..  The new system, which will be implemented over the next couple years, will push top performers in their ranks ahead of those who have served longer in the same position for sergeant first class and above. ..  Read More     First They Lowered The Physical Requirements For Women; Now The Promotion Requirements.

♦       May 8, 2019 .. 6th Cir.:  Barrow  v. Cleveland ..  Jerome Barrow, an African-American male, began his long career with the [Cleveland Police] in 1979. Barrow was a good officer; he received high marks and rose through the ranks.    In 1993, he was promoted to sergeant.    Barrow achieved the rank of lieutenant in 2005, and later joined the vice unit, where he spent most of the rest of his career.    Barrow took the test to become a captain in 2011, but failed to achieve a passing score. Of the officers who took the exam, eight passed and two (including Barrow) failed. Only one of the officers who passed was African-American.    After learning of the test results, Barrow filed a charge with the EEOC alleging that the test was racially discriminatory.    Following his EEOC charge, Barrow experienced several employment actions that he claims were in retaliation for his EEOC complaint.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 7, 2019 .. 6th Cir.:  Romano v. Hudson ..  The Hudson City School District (“Hudson”) in Ohio is one of the highest-achieving school districts in the country.    Trisha Romano applied to work there as a teacher every year from 2012 through 2016.    She was never hired and, eventually, stopped being interviewed.    In 2017, Romano filed a complaint alleging, among other things, age discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (the “ADEA”) and retaliation in violation of the ADEA.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 7, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Robinson v. DVA ..  Petitioner Robinson appeals the Merit Systems Protection Board’s decision to uphold the Department of Veterans Affairs’ removal of Mr. Robinson as Associate Director of the Phoenix Veterans Administration Health Care System.    BACKGROUND    Mr. Robinson became the Associate Director of the Phoenix Veterans Administration Health Care System (“Phoenix VA”) in May 2012.    During his tenure as Associate Director, Mr. Robinson was aware that scheduling issues were a problem, including the fact that it often took more than thirty days for patients to receive new-patient appointments.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 7, 2019 .. WCA:  Engstrom-Stockwell v. Microsoft ..  George Engstrom and John Stockwell appeal the trial court's summary judgment dismissal of their claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy against Microsoft Corporation. They believe that they were terminated from Microsoft as retaliation for initiating an investigation into another Microsoft employee.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 6, 2019 .. PCC:  Ream v. PA DPW ..  On appeal, we consider whether the trial court erred in [denying] Jennifer Ream's (Ream) claim for constructive discharge due to retaliation for protected activity.    The incident that precipitated Ream’s decision to quit her job occurred in June 2014 when a resident wandered away while Ream was assisting four other residents with dining. Ream believed that another RSA was monitoring the resident in the restroom.    On July 10, 2014, Ream quit her job out of fear of possible termination.    She voluntarily terminated her position notwithstanding a “satisfactory” final work evaluation and special commendations from her work supervisor. In August 2014, the Department issued a notice of no-discipline to Ream regarding the June 2014 incident.    In October 2015, Ream filed the instant complaint.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 3, 2019 .. VA OIG:  This audit substantiated that the psychologist improperly coded mental health services for about 66 percent of patient encounters for a 20-week period. The psychologist double-coded services, used codes not supported by the medical documentation, and entered codes not permitted for psychologists’ use. Also, the psychologist received about $7,700 in salary for clinic time not spent providing direct patient care and more than 243 hours in unnecessary overtime pay.  vaoig   (.pdf)

♦       May 3, 2019 .. DOJ OIG:  Investigative Summary: Findings of Misconduct by an FBI Special Agent in Charge and Assistant Special Agent in Charge for Failing to Ensure Contact with a Known Drug Trafficker was Handled According to FBI Policy ...     Justice.gov   (.pdf)

♦       May 3, 2019 .. 9th Cir.:  EEOC v. Jeanswear ..  1. The district court abused its discretion when it held that the subpoenaed information was not relevant to L.B.’s charge.    2. The district court also abused its discretion when it held that the subpoena was unduly burdensome.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 2, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Mogil v. DVA ..  Allyn Mogil served as an engineering technician at the VA Medical Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota from 2008 to 2017.    In this role, he was responsible for development, design, and implementation of VA engineering and maintenance projects, including new construction, renovation, and equipment replacement and service.    Around November 2016, he began sharing an office with Tony Horacek. Their office had three light fixtures controlled by two switches. They had an ongoing dispute over whether the lights should remain on or off in their office.    One day Mr. Mogil returned to the office and discovered that Mr. Horacek had turned the lights off.    Mr. Mogil “snapped,”    He retrieved a hammer from the facility’s electrical shop, and smashed the light switch with the hammer, which permanently disabled the lighting in his office [...] . ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 2, 2019 .. FLRA:  AFGE v. Immigration ..  In this case, the Agency issued memoranda to employees to notify them of misconduct investigations, and to suspend certain workplace privileges during the course of those investigations.    Arbitrator John M. Donoghue found that issuing these memoranda prior to the completion of investigations by the Office of Security and Integrity (OSI) was not prohibited by the Agency’s regulations or the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement.    On March 27, 2018, the Union filed exceptions [appeals] to the award, and on April 27, 2018, the Agency filed an opposition to the Union’s exceptions.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 2, 2019 .. Fed. Cl.:  Oliva v. U.S. (DVA) ..  In this breach of contract action, plaintiff, Steven J. Oliva, seeks to recover relocation incentive pay and lost salary from the government in connection with certain alleged breaches of the Settlement Agreement that he entered with the VA on or about January 30, 2015.    Plaintiff periodically worked for the VA from 2000 until his termination from the agency in 2016.    After spending 8 years employed in the private sector, plaintiff returned to the VA in 2012, as an Associate Director of Pharmacy Customer Care at the Health Resource Center located in Waco, TX.    Thereafter, plaintiff worked as an Associate Director of Contract Management for the VA’s Health Resource Center headquarters located in Topeka, KS and the Campus of the Central Texas Veterans Healthcare System located in Waco, TX.    In the amended complaint, plaintiff alleges that the VA breached the Settlement Agreement in March 2015 and February 2016, respectively, and that he did not receive certain job offers [...].  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 1, 2019 .. DOJ OIG:  Investigative Summary: Findings of Misconduct by a DEA Assistant Special Agent in Charge for Failure to Act in a Professional Manner, and by a DEA Special Agent in Charge for Favoritism and Providing False Statements to the OIG ...     Justice.gov   (.pdf)

♦       May 1, 2019 .. 10th Cir.:  Provencio v. Intel ..  INTEL INSIDE    INSIDE INTEL :   Jollene Provencio appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Intel Corporation.    Provencio worked for Intel for nearly 20 years. In March 2015, she participated as a witness in an internal investigation of another employee’s age-discrimination complaint.    Although Provencio did not tell the investigator she had witnessed age discrimination, she did complain that some of her supervisors had created a hostile work environment.    She described a female supervisor, Janice Lee, as a bully who seemed to have issues with women, and she stated that a male supervisor, Randie Dorrance, would not write up any managers.    A few months later, Provencio’s direct supervisor, Keith Baumgardner, told her that three other managers—Lee, Dorrance (who was Baumgardner’s supervisor), and Jeff Kiehne—had complained that she was unapproachable and difficult to work with.    Baumgardner had not received complaints about Provencio’s job performance before she participated in the internal investigation.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       May 1, 2019 .. TCA:  Jones v. Allman ..  The plaintiff, Leslie K. Jones, was hired by Tennessee State University (“TSU”) in 1999 as a campus security officer.    On March 1, 2012, TSU provided notice to Mr. Jones that his employment with TSU would be terminated as of March 15, 2012.    The record reflects that Mr. Jones’s termination followed an incident wherein he was reprimanded for issuing an emergency alert, allegedly without justification.    On May 25, 2012, TSU’s Director of Human Resources sent a letter to Mr. Jones, denying Mr. Jones’s request for a grievance hearing.    On December 18, 2012, Mr. Jones retained attorney Andy Allman to assist him with this matter.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 30, 2019 .. FLRA:  Energy v. AFGE ..  The Union filed a grievance on behalf of a group of dispatchers who alleged that they were not receiving the prevailing rate of pay for work on holidays.    The Agency denied the grievance.    At arbitration, as relevant here, the Arbitrator addressed whether the grievance was arbitrable and whether the Agency should have paid the dispatchers a higher rate of holiday premium pay. ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 30, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  Hudson v. Tyson ..  Hudson began working for Tyson as a tray packer in August 2015.    Hudson’s post-job offer health assessment showed that Hudson identified asthma and back problems on her health assessment, but checked the box “No” when asked “Do you have any work restrictions?”    Within her first week on the job, however, she complained of back pain to her line leader. A day or two later, she was sent to the nurse’s station to discuss her back complaints.    On September 6, 2016, Hudson filed the present suit against Tyson, alleging that Tyson violated her rights under the ADA by failing to accommodate her disabilities.    Specifically, in her pro se complaint, she alleged that she was forced to resign in September 2015 after Tyson was unable to accommodate her back injury and asthma.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 30, 2019 .. 9th Cir.:  Weil v. Citizens Telecom ..  On April 1, 2013, David Weil was notified he had not been selected for the promotion.   Also in April, Potts prepared a Development Action Plan (DAP) for David Weil, which identified areas for improvement, and Weil agreed to follow through on several “action items.”   Later that month, David Weil spoke with L.H., who was then working for Frontier in her new capacity.     In his deposition, Weil described what L.H. told him as follows:     She had made it a – that the statement saying that she felt I was qualified for the job. She tried to get me into the director role; I had three things that were against me, and her exact verbiage – I remember this clearly – is ‘You have three things going against you. (1) You’re a former Verizon employee, okay. (2) You’re not white. And (3) you’re not female.’   L.H. was later terminated in June 2013.   David Weil failed to meet the DAP deadlines and complete action items. In June 2013, he was put on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) for a 60-day period to end on August     Frontier terminated Weil on August 15, 2013, prior to the end of his PIP.   Weil brought suit against Frontier.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 29, 2019 .. DOD OIG:  Report of Investigation: Patrick M. Shanahan Acting Secretary of Defense:    On March 15, 2019, we initiated an investigation into allegations that Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick M. Shanahan, took actions to promote his former employer, Boeing, and disparage its competitors, allegedly in violation of his ethical obligations. We received similar allegations from various referrals.  dod ig

♦       Apr 29, 2019 .. 1st Cir.:  Pena v. Honeywell ..  Plaintiff Mayra F. Pena worked as a machine operator and associate assembler for defendant Honeywell International, Inc. (Honeywell), until Honeywell terminated her employment on June 17, 2013, on the basis of job abandonment.    Pena had not come to work since March 8, 2013. On September 20, 2013, Pena applied for Social Security Disability Income (SSDI) benefits, asserting that she was totally disabled and had been since March 8, 2013.    On April 16, 2015, Pena filed this suit [...] claiming that Honeywell terminated her employment on the basis of her disabilities, failed to provide her with reasonable accommodations, and retaliated against her.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 29, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Coppola v. DVA ..  Dr. Coppola was employed as a part-time physician for the Department of Veterans Affairs.    On February 8, 2011, Dr. Coppola filed an EEO complaint alleging wage violations due to age discrimination within the VA.    In particular, Dr. Coppola alleged that he was denied certain pay increases between 2005 and 2010 on the basis of age.    While his EEO complaint was pending, Dr. Coppola participated in an investigation by the Office of the Medical Inspector into complaints concerning patient care and safety at his workplace.    On September 10, 2012, Dr. Cop- pola appeared on a local news station to discuss the results of the investigation and his own observations and concerns. On September 13, 2012, Dr. Coppola received notice from the VA that he would be terminated from his position in approximately two weeks.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 26, 2019 .. D.D.C.:  Francis v. Perez (Labor) ..  Dr. Francis, Ph.D, sues R. Alexander Acosta in his official capacity as Secretary of the Department of Labor for alleged discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.    BACKGROUND:    Dr. Francis is an African-American female of West Indian descent who was over the age of 40 at all times relevant to this case and who engaged in protected activity by asserting rights to equal employment opportunity (EEO).    Dr. Francis joined the Department of Labor (DOL) in June 2007 to serve as Chief of the Branch of Budget Formulation and Implementation in the Office of Management.    READ ON     ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 26, 2019 .. 6th Cir.:  Hunt v.  Monro ..  Monro employed Hunt as an automotive technician in Medina, Ohio from August 2016 to November 2017. In that role, Hunt was responsible for diagnosing and repairing vehicles.    From late 2016 to early 2017, the Medina store’s management altered several of Hunt’s time records after concluding Hunt’s time entries were inflated—he would, for example, punch in early or not punch out for lunches or at the end of his shift.    And he sometimes logged back in to the POS system and re-altered the time entries. Monro commenced an investigation, but ultimately could not “confirm whether Hunt was ever present in the [Medina] Store during the time that he alleged that he was working.” ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 26, 2019 .. 6th Cir.:  U.S. v. Wise ..  A federal grand jury indicted Battle and Wise—along with fifteen other individuals—as part of a conspiracy to distribute cocaine around northern Ohio.    As the district court put simply, Battle “has just been a drug trafficker his entire life.” And Wise adds fifteen convictions of his own, including drug trafficking, possession of crack cocaine, and various thefts.    The district court sentenced Wise to 33 months in prison—12 months longer than recommended by the Sentencing Guidelines. Battle received 210 months. Both sentences included ten years of supervised release following release from prison.    Each defendant now appeals his sentence for various reasons.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 25, 2019 .. A.F.C.C.A.:  U.S. v. Lundby ..  Appellant was assigned to Pope Army Airfield, Fort Bragg, North Carolina, where he was a frequent visitor to the two Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES) facilities, commonly referred to as the North Post Exchange (North PX) and the South Post Exchange (South PX).    At some point in 2015, AAFES customer service personnel began reporting unusual activity to the loss prevention department. Specifically, they reported that Appellant was returning multiple high-dollar items for refund. Over the course of the following year, the loss prevention department began tracking Appellant’s in-store and online transactions.    Their investigation revealed that Appellant would place an order through the AAFES website and then present the receipt to return the item in-person at the North or South PX. Shortly after making the in-person return, often within less than an hour, Appellant would present the same receipt to return an identical item to the other PX. The source of the second item Appellant returned was unknown.    Appellant was convicted of having made 18 fraudulent claims, each time presenting the same AAFES online-order receipt for two separate returns. In total, Appellant was refunded approximately $6,871.18 more than the amount he purchased through AAFES.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 25, 2019 .. 7th Cir.:  Brown v. Wal-Mart  ..  Brown, who is African American, did not get along with his colleagues in the bakery department. A month into his employment, he was confronted about his job performance by a coworker. She called him “rug rat” and “boy,” and, when Brown pointed his finger at her, she slapped his hand. Brown reported the incident to a manager, who told him that it would be addressed.    Brown also filed a complaint about the incident with Wal-Mart’s ethics office. Two weeks later, Brown filed a second complaint against his coworker as well as the bakery department’s supervisor, who, he believed, retaliated against him for his earlier complaint by assigning him additional duties.    Wal-Mart investigated Brown’s complaints, concluded that the coworker had acted inappropriately by slapping his hand, and reprimanded her. But Wal-Mart concluded that Brown’s claims of retaliation were not substantiated. Meanwhile, Wal-Mart granted Brown’s request to be transferred to the electronics department.    Shortly after his transfer to the electronics department, however, Brown was tardy for his shift. His tardiness meant that he had accumulated a certain number of unauthorized absence “points” that, under company policy, subjected him to termination. The next day his new supervisor fired him for accruing too many unauthorized absences.    After receiving a right-to-sue letter from the EEOC, Brown brought this suit asserting discrimination based on his race, color, and sex, as well as retaliatory discharge for filing two internal complaints against his colleagues.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 24, 2019 .. D.C. Cir.:  U.S. v. Thompson ..  Appellants Oral Thompson and Dwight Knowles appeal their convictions for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine (5 kilograms or more) on an aircraft registered in the United States or owned by a United States citizen.    Neither stepped foot in the United States, and they argue that the conspiracy crime does not have an extraterritorial reach.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 24, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  McQueen v. ADT ..  Mr. McQueen, who was represented by counsel in the proceedings below, asserted race discrimination claims based on unequal pay, 2 a hostile work environment claim, and a retaliation claim against ALDOT and the State.    Mr. McQueen also asserted a claim [...] against the Individual Defendants, alleging that they allowed the creation of a racially hostile work environment and retaliated against him [...] .    We review a district court’s order granting summary judgment de novo [...] .    COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 24, 2019 .. 7th Cir.:  Phillips v. Baxter ..  Garfield Phillips, a former employee of the Illinois Department of Human Services, quit his job because, he says, his supervisors harassed him and discriminated against him.    He sued the Department and four of his former supervisors, alleging national-origin and ethnicity discrimination, retaliation, conspiracy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.    The district court granted a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim and then denied leave to file a proposed amended complaint for the same reason.    Because Phillips stated a claim for discrimination, we partially vacate the dismissal and remand for further proceedings.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 23, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Hiller v. DHS ..  Susan J. Hiller appeals from a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board.    Ms. Hiller worked as a full-time attorney-instructor at the Office of Training and Development (OTD) at the Im- migration and Customs Enforcement Academy in Charles- ton, South Carolina.    She, along with a contract attorney in Charleston and nine full-time attorney-instructors in Glynco, Georgia, taught section 287g and other basic legal classes to law enforcement officers.    In 2011, Ms. Hiller filed complaints with the Office of Inspector General and the Office of Special Counsel about workplace safety concerns and the misuse of government vehicles.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 23, 2019 .. 3rd Cir.:  LaRochelle v. Wilmac ..  Defendants hired Riker as a Certified Nursing Assistant (“CNA”)7 in 2009. Riker claims that starting in 2010, CNA Teddy Bernard subjected her and other female staff to sexual harassment and that she complained to supervisors about Bernard’s behavior several times before June 2011.    In June 2011, Riker informed the Director of Human Resources that Bernard came from behind and hugged her, that his “behavior has largely been ignored by licensed staff,” and that she “fear[ed] retaliation” for reporting his conduct.    Bernard was suspended pending the investigation and ultimately terminated.    During 2011, Riker sought workers’ compensation for two injuries she identified as work-related.    The last day Riker worked for Defendants was in early January 2012. In early January, Riker’s physician told her that she could return to work later that month if she performed light duty with weight restrictions.    Riker faxed this report to the Director of Human Resources. The Director of Human Resources informed Riker that Defendants would not accommodate non-work-related injuries. Riker subsequently filed for unemployment compensation and began collecting unemployment benefits the first week of February 2012.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr22, 2019 .. 5th Cir.:  O'Daniel v. ISS ..  Plaintiff-Appellant Bonnie O’Daniel sued her former employers for firing her allegedly because of “the Plaintiff’s sexual orientation [heterosexual] and Ms. Huber’s reaction to the Plaintiff’s pro-heterosexual speech.”  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 22, 2019 .. 2d Cir.:  Atkins v. Rochester CS ..  The following facts are undisputed. Atkins, an African-American woman in her mid- sixties, was assigned to be principal of the Freddie Thomas High School (“Freddie Thomas”) for the 2012-13 school year. Freddie Thomas was one of ten schools in the District that had been targeted for phase-out and closure.    During the 2012-13 school year, Principals received a total score based on several categories, and that numerical score corresponded to one of four ratings: highly effective, effective, developing, and ineffective. In September 2013, Atkins received a rating of “developing” for the prior school year of 2012-13.    She appealed the rating, but her appeal was denied by a unanimous appeals panel.    The parties dispute whether the District calculated Atkins’s underlying APPR score in accordance with the agreed-upon criteria, and whether the appeals panel properly affirmed the “developing” rating.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 19, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  Murphy v. Army ..  Amy Murphy appeals the district court’s order dismissing her discrimination claims under the Rehabilitation Act of [...] MSPB’s decision affirming the DOA’s determination to remove her from federal service because the DOA committed harmful procedural errors and rendered an unreasonable decision.    First, Murphy argues that the district court erred [..] because her claims implicated the DOA’s decision to suspend and revoke her security clearance. Next, she argues that the district court abused its discretion by denying her two motions to amend her complaint.    Lastly, she argues that the district court erred by affirming the MSPB’s decision affirming the DOA’s determination to remove her from federal service because the DOA committed harmful procedural errors and rendered an unreasonable decision.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 19, 2019 .. 2d Cir.:  Shojae v. HHC ..  Pari Shojae appeals from a judgment of the District Court (Forrest, J.)    As to Pari Shojae’s timely NYCHRL discrimination claims with respect to certain adverse actions, it appears that Shojae provided at least some admissible evidence that she was treated “less well” based on her gender, race, or national origin.    In particular, Shojae testified that Khan, while acting as her supervisor, altered the terms of Shojae’s job, made derogatory comments to her about her gender, identity as a Shia Muslim, and Persian ethnicity, and openly favored employees of Pakistani origin.    We therefore vacate the dismissal of Shojae’s NYCHRL discrimination claims against Khan and the Hospital.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 19, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  Arrington v.  Alabama Power ..  Plaintiff Lucille Yvette Arrington, proceeding pro se, appeals the dismissal of her claims for discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act, as well as her personal injury claim for “workplace hazard.”    On appeal, Plaintiff recounts the events that led to her alleged constructive discharge and asserts that she established a prima facie case of retaliation.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 19, 2019 .. 2d Cir.:  Natofsky v. New York ..  Plaintiff-Appellant Richard Natofsky who suffers from a hearing disability, brought this action alleging violations of Section 504 of Rehabilitation Act of 1973.    Natofsky claims that, during his tenure working for the New York City Department of Investigation (the ʺDOIʺ), he experienced several adverse employment actions because of his hearing disability, including his eventual demotion.    He also claims that the DOI failed to accommodate his disability and retaliated against him.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 18, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  Fed. Cir. v. United States (Postal) ..  On April 24, 2009, Ms. VanDesande filed suit in the Court of Federal Claims.    In her suit, she alleged that the United States Postal Service (“Postal Service”) had breached the Stipulation Agreement Regarding Damages that she and the Postal Service had entered into in June of 2003.    The purpose of the Stipulation Agreement was to finally resolve a proceeding brought by Ms. VanDesande before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”).  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 18, 2019 .. 2d Cir.:  Spillers v. NYC H&H ..  Mark Spillers sued his former employers, the New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation and Kings County Hospital Center, claiming, among other things, that they violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by failing to provide reasonable accommodations for his mental disability.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 18, 2019 .. 9th Cir.:  Washington v. Ryan ..  At around 11:45 p.m. on the night of June 8, 1987, two men forced their way into Ralph and Sterleen Hill’s Yuma, Arizona home in what turned out to be a disastrously violent home invasion. The men forced the Hills to lie face down on the floor of the master bedroom and bound their hands behind their backs. One of the men intermittently “screwed” a pistol in Ralph’s ear while both men yelled at the couple demanding that the Hills give them drugs or money. Ralph glimpsed one of the assailants as he ransacked the drawers and closets in the room. The Hills were discovered lying face down in their bedroom. Both had been shot in the back of the head. Ralph survived the horrendous shot to his head, but was seriously injured. Sterleen did not survive the shooting.   Police arrested Fred Robinson shortly after the incident.      In 1987, a jury found Washington guilty of six crimes involving the robbery and murder of Sterleen Hill in her Arizona home.      The court sentenced Washington to death.      Arizona state prisoner Theodore Washington appeals the district court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus ... .    COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 17, 2019 .. A.F.C.C.A.:  U.S. v. Easterly ..  A general court-martial composed of officer members convicted Appellant, contrary to his pleas, of attempted premeditated murder in violation of Arti- cle 80, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U.S.C. § 880.    The members adjudged a sentence of a dishonorable discharge, confinement for seven years, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and reduction to the grade of E-1. The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged.    Appellant asserts six assignments of error:  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 17, 2019 .. FLRA:  Homeland v. NBPC ..  Statement of the Case:    In this decision, we hold that the Arbitrator may not substitute her own judgment and second-guess a determination made by the Agency’s ethics official that the grievant’s outside employment would create an appearance of a conflict of interest.[1]    The grievant requested permission to work during his off-duty time as an emergency medical technician (EMT). The Agency sought the advice of its ethics officer and found a potential conflict of interest between the grievant’s duties as a border patrol agent to report suspected undocumented immigrants and his duty as an EMT to maintain patient confidentiality under Texas law.    Based on that advice, the Agency denied the grievant’s request.    Arbitrator Kathy L. Eisenmenger determined that the Agency violated the parties’ collective‑bargaining agreement when it denied the grievant’s request to work off-duty.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 16, 2019 .. D.D.C.:  Hall v. EEOC ..  Plaintiff Steven Hall, proceeding pro se, is a former employee of the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”). He brings this suit challenging the rescission of his Workers’ Compensation benefits and his termination from federal service.    Plaintiff, an African-American male and a disabled veteran, began working for DHS on August 2, 2010.    In August 2012, Plaintiff suffered from “illnesses/injuries” at a construction site at St. Elizabeth’s Hospital, where he presumably was assigned to work.    On November 20, 2012, he filed a claim with the Department of Labor’s Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (“OWCP”).    His request for benefits was approved in January 2013.    By letter dated January 22, 2013, Gary Myers, a DHS Program Manager/Policy Advisor, requested that the OWCP overturn its decision and preclude Plaintiff from receiving benefits due to an insufficient causal link between Plaintiff’s job placement at St. Elizabeth’s and his respiratory issues.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 15, 2019 .. 10th Cir.:  Romero v. H&P ..  Silo Romero worked on an oil rig for Helmerich & Payne, and was fired after an extended dispute concerning workers’ compensation. Romero sued H&P alleging the company either actually or constructively discharged him in retaliation for pursuing his workers’ compensation claim.    At trial, the jury found H&P both actually and constructively discharged Romero.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 15, 2019 .. 3rd Cir.:  Andujar v. GNC ..  General Nutrition Corporation (GNC) appeals a $258,926 judgment in favor of Santos Andujar, a former GNC store manager who sued for age discrimination after the company fired him.    Andujar was a GNC store manager for some thirteen years before he was terminated at age 57. He was evaluated annually through GNC’s Performance Evaluation Process (PEP). The maximum score for a PEP was 500, with 300 as the passing score. GNC also audited inventory and recordkeeping at each store through its Critical Point Audits (CPA). A passing CPA score was 90%, but Andujar’s store earned scores of 88% in 2010, 68% in 2011, 79% in 2012, and 88% in 2013.    On January 23, 2014, Andujar received a failing PEP score of 287. That same day, GNC manager Christian Gosseaux imposed a Red Store Action Plan, which gave Andujar 30 days to make improvements. Approximately one month later, Gosseaux fired Andujar for failing to comply with the Action Plan.    GNC replaced him with a man in his twenties.    Andujar sued GNC in New Jersey state court, alleging wrongful termination in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD).  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 12, 2019 .. VA OIG:  Review of Delays in Clinical Consult Processing at VA Boston Healthcare System, Massachusetts:    The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted a healthcare inspection in response to a complaint that staff at the VA Boston Healthcare System in Massachusetts inappropriately discontinued consults (healthcare providers use consults to request an opinion, advice, or expertise regarding patients’ specific problems).  vaoig

♦       Apr 11, 2019 .. IL App:  Liu v. Four Seasons ..  Plaintiffs filed a class action complaint, alleging that their employer, Four Seasons Hotel, Ltd. (Four Seasons), violated the Act in its method of collecting, using, storing, and disclosing their biometric data, namely, their fingerprints for timekeeping purposes. Four Seasons filed a motion to compel arbitration, arguing that the plaintiffs signed an employment agreement that required four types of employment disputes, including “wage or hour violation” claims, be submitted to an arbitrator. ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 9, 2019 .. 2d Cir.:  Davis-Garett  v. Urban Outfitters ..  From September 2012 until early October 2013 Garett was employed by Anthropologie, a nationwide retailer that sells women's apparel and accessories, home furnishings, decor, gifts, and "found objects."    Garett filed a complaint alleging principally that Anthropologie and its corporate parent Urban Outfitters, Inc., discriminated against her on the basis of age by maintaining a hostile work environment and retaliated against her for lodging discrimination complaints.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 9, 2019 .. 11th Cir.:  Wilburn v. U.S. (OSHA) ..  Wilbur served as a compliance safety and health officer for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). His amended complaint alleges that in November or December of 2011, the area director (AD) for OSHA’s Mobile, Alabama office “performed a crude and sexually obnoxious behavior” in which the AD simulated a sexual act. Wilbur, finding the AD’s behavior “morally offensive,” reported the AD to his union representative, but nothing came of it.    In January 2012, the AD did the same thing in front of a new employee. This time Wilbur reported the behavior to the assistant area director, but again nothing came of it.    Wilbur continued to complain, but the assistant area director warned him “not to continue making waves in the office.”    Wilbur’s work life quickly went downhill from there. In March 2013, he was “verbally admonished” regarding one of his inspections. In June, he received a poor mid-year performance evaluation. There were smaller slights as well:  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 8, 2019 .. FSIP:  AIR FORCE v. AFGE ..  This case [...] concerns the issuance of a local dress code standard for civilian Instructors who work in the classrooms, out on the flight line, and on the hanger floor in the 82nd Training Wing of the Sheppard Air Force Base in Wichita Falls, Texas (Agency).    The dispute was filed pursuant to §7119 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute). ..  FSIP DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.rtf)

♦       Apr 8, 2019 .. ISC:  Slaughter v. DUC.OM ..  Plaintiff appeals summary judgment dismissing claim that medical school failed to accommodate her mental disability and evidentiary ruling declining to impute confidential knowledge of psychotherapist to the school.    The medical school expelled her based on her failing grades and lack of academic promise.    The student filed a complaint against the medical school with the Iowa Civil Rights Commission and then filed this district court action alleging the school failed to accommodate her mental disability.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 5, 2019 .. FLRA:  VA v. AFGE ..  In this case, the Authority holds that the Agency is obligated to provide bargaining unit employees (BUEs) and their Union representatives recordings and transcripts it agreed to provide in the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement.    Arbitrator John B. Dorsey found that the Agency violated the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement (CBA) by failing to provide employees and the Union certain investigation-related materials. As a remedy, the Arbitrator directed the Agency to provide these materials to employees and the Union.    The Agency files essence and exceeded-authority exceptions, and argues that the award is impossible to implement.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 5, 2019 .. 7th Cir.:  Hernandez v. Nieves ..  Daisy Hernandez alleges that, in January 2013, Jessifer Home Health Agency, Inc., constructively discharged her based on her age, sex, and national origin.    Afterward, she asserts, her former supervisor stalked, surveilled, and threatened her [...].    We also understand Hernandez to blame her supervisor for the fact that she has not held any job for longer than a year since she left the Agency. Hernandez also appears to allege an overarching conspiracy to harm her, and, in her participating in this appeal.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 5, 2019 .. D.D.C.:  Torres v. UHL 25 ..  In October 2016, the Gaylord Hotel terminated Plaintiff, Cesar Parada Torres (Torres) for (1) leaving his work station, (2) striking a colleague named Ms. Byrd with two pieces of bread at her work station, and (3) threatening her to “take it outside.    Torres was a member of the Unite Here union's Local 25 bargaining unit. {Local 25}.   Local 25 represented Torres at the first-step grievance hearing with the Gaylord Hotel and advocated that Torres “be returned to work with full back pay and no loss of seniority.    After Gaylord denied the first-step grievance, Local 25 decided against further representing Torres, in mediation, the next phase of the disciplinary review process.    It based its decision on several factors, including Plaintiff’s three disciplinary issues in the prior eighteen months (including two separate instances of yelling at a coworker and using profanity at a coworker), video evidence and witness testimony of the altercation with Ms. Byrd that did not corroborate Torres’s version of events, and the fact that Torres confronted Ms. Byrd at her work station.    On July 30, 2017, Torres filed a charge of discrimination against Local 25.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 4, 2019 .. FLRA:  Air Force v. IAFF ..  In this case, we reaffirm that employees may be considered confidential under § 7103(a)(13) of the Federal [Labor-Management] Statute even if they do not personally negotiate contracts or grant and deny grievances. ..  FLRA DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 4, 2019 .. 5th Cir.:  Davis v. TCH ..  Texas Children’s Hospital fired its employee Ms. Tina Davis.    Davis then sued the hospital for: (1) discrimination (2) harassment (3) retaliation.    One example Davis gives:   Ms. Conchita was yelling at Davis, and so Davis walked away.   At which point, Ms. Conchita supposedly grabbed Davis from behind.    Next, Ms. Davis claims that [Mr.] Omar screamed at her that he “would do what he wants.”   And Davis also alleges that during this altercation, [Mr.] Omar was face to face with her, inches away, so that his spit hit her face.    Ms. Davis claims that she then sought transfer, but in response, her supervisors fired her.   So Ms. Davis filed an EEOC complaint.   And next, Davis sued.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 4, 2019 .. 3rd Cir.:  Komosa v. Postal ..  John Komosa worked for the U.S. Postal Service (U.S.P.S.) in Pittsburgh as a mail carrier beginning in 1999. In 2013, Komosa suffered a stroke that, according to Komosa and his doctor, required him to avoid climbing steps, a limitation that U.S.P.S. initially accommodated.    In 2015, Komosa began working under a new manager whose approach to Komosa’s accommodation differed, leaving Komosa unable to continue working his previous routes. Komosa filed an [E.E.O.] complaint making discrimination claims under the Rehabilitation Act.    As a federal employee, Komosa was required to file his complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity division of U.S.P.S., and he did so, filing both an informal complaint and a subsequent formal complaint that included an allegation of retaliation against Komosa following his informal complaint.  ..  COURT DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 3, 2019 .. FLRA:  AFGE v. Agriculture ..  THE AGENCY FILED A ULP ..  In 2008, the parties ratified their existing collective-bargaining agreement.    Article 38 of that agreement contains a reopener provision, which provides, as relevant here, that the parties will renegotiate the agreement if either party timely serves its written demand to bargain along with “initial written proposals, which may be supplemented during renegotiations.”    In 2017, the Agency served the Union with a demand to bargain a new agreement along with proposed negotiation ground rules.    The Union responded that the Agency had failed to satisfy the terms of Article 38 because the Agency did not submit all of its substantive proposals with its demand to bargain.    The Union refused to bargain.    The Agency filed an unfair-labor-practice (ULP) charge against the Union.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 2, 2019 .. FLRA:  Agriculture v. NAAE ..  Arbitrator Leonard M. Shapiro found that the Agency violated a U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) rule when the Agency determined that the seven grievants did not satisfy the minimum educational requirements for their positions and when it denied one of those grievants a promotion.   The Agency filed exceptions to the award.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 2, 2019 .. (5th Cir.:  Heath v. Southern ..  Dr. Panagiota Heath is an associate mathematics professor at Southern University at New Orleans (SUNO).   Dr. Mostafa Elaasar became Heath’s supervisor in 2003. Since that time, Heath alleges that Elaasar has harassed her continuously, creating a hostile work environment.   She claims that the harassment was due to her race, religion, sex, or national origin, in violation of Title VII and 28 U.S.C. § 1983.   She seeks to hold both the university and Elaasar liable for the harassment under Title VII and Elaasar responsible under section 1983.   Heath is a Christian female of Greek descent, while Elaasar is a male, and he is Muslim and of Egyptian descent.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 2, 2019 .. D.C. Cir.:  Guedes v. ATF ..  In October 2017, a lone gunman armed with bump-stock-enhanced semiautomatic weapons murdered 58 people and wounded hundreds more in a mass shooting at a concert in Las Vegas, Nevada.    In the wake of that tragedy, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“Bureau”) promulgated through formal notice-and-comment proceedings a rule that classifies bump-stock devices as machine guns under the National Firearms Act.    See Bump-Stock-Type Devices, 83 Fed. Reg. 66,514 (Dec. 26, 2018) (“Bump-Stock Rule”).    The then-Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker initially signed the final Bump-Stock Rule, and Attorney General William Barr independently ratified it shortly after taking office. Bump-stock owners and advocates filed separate lawsuits in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia to prevent the Rule from taking effect.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

♦       Apr 1, 2019 .. Fed. Cir.:  AFGE v. EEOC ..  In 2017, the [EEOC] removed David Hamilton from his position as an agency mediator.    Mr. Hamilton’s union filed a grievance challenging the removal. Pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement with the agency, Mr. Hamilton elected to have the challenge to his removal heard by an arbitrator rather than by the [MSPB].    Following a hearing, the arbitrator overturned Mr. Hamilton’s removal, but denied the union’s request for an award of attorney fees.    AFGE, has petitioned for review of the denial of attorney fees.  ..  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)



..... >