| .<<.PERMERICA-CLASSIC |
|
PERMERICA-VA.>>.
|
| 12-31: -OPM: Pay and Benefits for Non-Career Appointees Who Resign on January 20, 2009:..HERE | ||
| 12-24: -A POOR PERFORMANCE CASE: THE AGENCY REMOVED HER UNDER 5 U.S.C. CHAPTER 43, based upon a charge of unacceptable performance. The appellant pursued this action through the negotiated grievance procedure. The appellant contends that her removal was the result of age and race discrimination. ..The Decision | ||
| 12-24: -ANOTHER POOR PERFORMANCE CASE: HIS SUPERVISOR WARNED HIM ABOUT POOR PERFORMANCE IN THE CRITICAL ELEMENT. He was subsequently placed on a PIP. His performance didn't improve so he was removed. The union appealed. ..The Decision | ||
| 12-19: -OPM - WASHINGTON,DC, AREA SPECIAL PAY AND LEAVE PROCEDURES FOR HOLIDAYS ON JANUARY 19 AND 20, 2009:..[HERE] | ||
| 12-12: -MSPB: REVERSES REMOVAL OF FORMER UNION OFFICIAL CITING A PATTERN OF RETALIATION - .READMORE | ||
| 12-08: -FEDCIR: FOLLOW THE ORDER - THEN COMPLAIN LATER: HE FORGOT TO FOLLOW THE OLD ADAGE. SHE ORDERED HIM TO ... HE TOLD HER THAT SHE COULD NOT GIVE HIM AN ORDER BECAUSE SHE WAS NOT HIS DIRECT SUPEVISOR. HIS DIRECT FOLLOWED UP WITH A PROPOSED REMOVAL....READMORE | ||
| 12-04: -OEDCA DIGEST - Fall 2008: SUMMARIES OF SELECTED EEO DECISIONS ISSUED BY THE VA OFFICE OF EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINT ADJUDICATION. .. OEDCA DIGEST-CONDENSED VERSION | ||
| 12-01:.-NPR - OBAMA TO REVIEW EXPLOSION IN FEDERAL HR CONTRACTS:.Federal Contracts | ||
| 11-26:.-OPM - REFERENCE CHECKING GUIDANCE:.OPM Reference Check Guidance | ||
| PRESIDENT BUSH AND PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA AT THE WHITE HOUSE: Click On Link & Right Click on picture to "SET AS YOUR DESKTOP BACKGROUND" ]> LINK | ||
| 11-13: OPM ELIMINATED THE TIME IN GRADE RESTRICTION:..LET THE ABUSE BEGIN. The new Federal Friends and Family Plan. ..TEXT .. .PDF | ||
| 11-07: REMOVED FOR PULLING HIS ROSCOE ON THE PUNKS: He pulled up next to the school bus. Someone threw an object that hit his face. He caught up with the school bus then .... .decision | ||
| 11-06: REMOVED F0R BEING "LESS THAN CANDID": ON SF-86, HE SAID HE'D RECEIVED NO PAST DISCIPLINE. ..TSA learned that he'd been disciplined numerous times. .decision | ||
| 11-05:.WOW!.AMERICA, AND THE WORLD, CELEBRATES!. Congratulations to President-elect Obama. | ||
| 11-03: PERMERICA OPINION: EXCUSED ABSENCE FOR VOTING. The general 3 hour Excused Absence for Voting Model is not writen in stone. Agency heads are free to adapt 4 hour or 5 hour models as well. .Permerica Opinion | ||
| 10-21: REMOVED FROM SES: After his removal fron SES, he resigned then filed an EEO complaint claiming intolerable work conditions forced his resignation. .decision | ||
| 10-16: HOT!MSPB RELEASES NEW ALTERNATIVE DISCIPLINE STUDY:. Alternative discipline empowers proposing and deciding officials to work with the misbehaving employee in order to craft a solution that has the greatest potential to change that employee’s conduct. Traditional discipline should remain an option for management. .here | ||
| 10-15: YOU AIN'T POOR! DID SHE LOSE HER EEO CASE FOR LYING TO COURT CLAIMING POVERTY? :COURT: "While it is understandable that people may not be absolutely accurate in the amounts they list on the affidavit in support of the application for in forma pauperis status; it is hard to believe that an accountant, represented by counsel, whose husband is a GS-15 accountant, can underestimate her assets by more than $562,000." .decision | ||
| 10-15: OPM'S QUEST TO PRIVATIZE FEDERAL HR CONTINUES:.HR LOB..-..ALL | ||
|
||
| 10-14:.WHISTLE BLOWER: .DID VA RESPIRATORY THERAPIST'S TERMINATION VIOLATE WPA? | ||
| 10-03:.OPM ISSUES STRUCTURED INTERVIEW GUIDE: .Interview Guide | ||
| 10-03:.EEOC FEDERAL SECTOR PROGRAMS: PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE .here | ||
| 09-29:.OPM: OPEN SEASON, 2009 PREMIUMS, HR LOB, SSC MIGRATION AND MORE. HERE | ||
| 09-26:.RECENT MSPB DECISIONS: .All..Sep-26.-.Sep-19.-.Sep-12.-.Aug-29.-.Aug-22.-.Aug-08 | ||
| 09-25:.IS A "TIME-SERVED" SUSPENSION INHERENTLY ARBITRARY? .FEDCIR ISSUES PRECEDENTIAL DECISION: .THE ARBITRATOR REVERSED THE SSA REMOVAL ACTION 342 DAYS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE AND ORDERED THE APPELLANT REINSTATED WITHOUT BACK PAY. THE APPELLANT APPEALED ARGUING THAT A “TIME SERVED” SUSPENSION IS INHERENTLY ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS, BECAUSE IT IS BASED SOLELY ON THE LENGTH OF TIME THAT ELAPSES BETWEEN THE DATE OF THE TERMINATION AND THE DATE OF THE ARBITRATOR'S DECISION. FEDCIR: "THE ARBITRATOR'S IMPOSITION OF A “TIME SERVED” SUSPENSION IS [] ARBITRARY AND MUST BE VACATED." .decision | ||
| 09-24:.SEXUAL HARASSMENT: CAUTION! .WHEN YOU CHARGE "SEXUAL HARASSMENT" YOU CREATE AN UNNECESSARY BURDEN FOR THE AGENCY. CHARGES LIKE "CONDUCT UNBECOMING" OR "INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT" WOULD SUFFICE. When an agency charges an employee with violating its sexual harassment policy and that policy explicitly references the Title VII standard, the Title VII standard must be applied. The agency also bears this burden if its sexual harassment policy tracks Title VII regulations, even if it does not explicitly reference them. .decision | ||
| 09-18:.THIS
DECISION SETS PRIORITY CONSIDERATION ON ITS HEAD: .A
MUST READ! Violation of Veterans Employment
Opportunities Act (VEOA) Two
applicants were given priority consideration for future vacancies based
on irregularities during the recruitment process to fill Job A. Job
B was announced. A veteran applied for Job B and was determined to
be qualified and placed on the certificate of eligibles the merit promotion
process. The two priority consideration applicants were
referred ahead of other competitive applicants for Job B.
One of the priority consideration applicants was selected for Job B.
The Veteran appealed to MSPB. MSPB:
"Although priority consideration for future vacancies may generally
be the proper remedy for an individual who was denied consideration for
a position for which he was qualified due to an invalid employment practice,
we have found no statutory authority that provides for the use of priority
consideration as a means to exclude from competition a preference eligible
or qualified veteran entitled to the rights set forth at 5 U.S.C. §
3304(f)(1) [VEOA]." ... "The agency’s
decision cannot be sustained when challenged in a VEOA appeal by a preference
eligible like the appellant because it denies him the statutory opportunity
to compete guaranteed to him by the VEOA [ 5 U.S.C. § 3304(f) ].
Accordingly, we find that the agency’s failure to consider the appellant
for [ Job B ] violated the VEOA [ 5 U.S.C. § 3304(f)(1) ] by
denying him the opportunity to compete for a bona fide vacancy in a situation
where the agency was accepting applications from outside its workforce."
.decision
THIS MAY BE A MORE SWEEPING GAME CHANGER. NOTE: ON SECOND READING, IT APPEARS THAT THIS DECISION MAY BE MORE FAR REACHING THAN THE PRIORITY CONSIDERATION SITUATION DISCUSSED THERIN. READ CAREFULLY. |
||
| 09-10:
WAS
SHE TERMINATED IN RETALIATION FOR FILING EEO COMPLAINT?
On March 23, the appellant filed a formal EEO complaint, alleging that her first-level supervisor subjected her to a hostile work environment, harassment and retaliation. ... On March 26, the appellant’s second-level supervisor notified her that she would be terminated for conduct and performance reasons. .decision |
||
| 09-10: REMOVED FOR RUNNING A STOP SIGN: HE APPEALED TO FEDCIR. .decision | ||
| 09-08: EEOC Q&As: THIS IS A GREAT GUIDE!...EEOC issued a comprehensive question-and-answer guide addressing how the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) applies to a wide variety of performance and conduct issues. .here | ||
| 09-05: DISCLAIMER: PERMERICA.COM IS A PRIVATE NON-GOVERNMENT WEBSITE .. more | ||
| 09-02:.FEDCIR:INDEFINITE SUSPENSION REVERSED!.Information Technology Manager was placed on an Indefinite suspension, after he was indicted in state court on two counts of criminal conduct, pending the outcome of the criminal proceedings. The employee appealed. He argued that the agency failed to establish a “demonstrable connection” between his job duties and the off-duty offense with which he was charged. MSPB: We sustain the indefinite suspension. FEDCIR: We agree with [the employee] that the Board’s finding of a nexus between the charges against him and the efficiency of the service is not supported by substantial evidence. For the foregoing reason, the final decision of the Board sustaining [the employee's] indefinite suspension is reversed. decision | ||
| 08-29: INVESTIGATIONS: .OPM is responsible for conducting over 90% of the background investigations for the Federal Government, and expects to conduct over 2.3 million this fiscal year. .here | ||
| 08-28: EEOC: NEW Q&As Promoting Employment of Individuals with Disabilities. .here | ||
| 08-25: OFFICE OF SPECIAL COUNSEL to DEPT OF LABOR: - You Are Ordered To Fire Him - Now! .decision | ||
| 08-25: DISCLAIMER: PERMERICA.COM IS A PRIVATE NON-GOVERNMENT WEBSITE | ||
| 08-20: EEOC ISSUES FEDERAL WORK FORCE REPORT FOR 2007 - In FY 2007, federal employees and applicants filed 16,363 complaints alleging employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, religion, age, disability and reprisal – down from 16,723 complaints in FY 2006 and 18,000 complaints in FY 2005. Agencies also reduced the average processing time for conducting investigations from 186 days in FY 2006 to 176 days in FY 2007, the best investigation times reported in the last 14 years. .report | ||
| 08-18: TERMINATION DURING TRIAL PERIOD REVERSED! .AGENCY ORDERED TO PAY $99, 000. .decision | ||
| 08-11: REMOVED! "I WAS NOT AWARE OF VA LEAVE REQUEST PROCEDURES." ..decision | ||
| 08-11: LEAVE: Update on Excused Absence for Employees Returning from Active Military Duty. here | ||
| 08-07: TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION - The appellant had surgery on her left knee on February 27. She was diagnosed with breast cancer on April 24; she had surgery for that condition on May 15, 2006; and on May 30, she had surgery on her right knee. Although she was scheduled to begin radiation therapy the following month, that therapy was canceled after the she (appellant) learned that she was pregnant. ..decision | ||
| 08-07:
MSPB:
PROBATIONARY TERMINATION - Write
This Down 'Cause You'll Need It Later: A
probationary employee terminated for post-appointment reasons may appeal
to the Board only on the grounds that the termination was based upon partisan
political reasons or marital status. 5
C.F.R. § 315.806(a), (b). The appellant has not alleged
that he was terminated for partisan political reasons or because of his
marital status; however, he claims that he was not a probationary employee
on account of his prior federal service and so has Board appeal rights.
To qualify as an “employee” with appeal rights under 5 U.S.C. Chapter 75,
the appellant, as a competitive service employee, must show that he either
is not serving a probationary period or has completed one year of current
continuous service under an appointment other than a temporary one limited
to a year or less. 5
U.S.C. sect 7511(a)(1)(A); McCormick
v. Department of the Air Force, 307 F.3d 1339, 1341-44 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
An appellant who has not served a full year under his appointment can show
that he has completed the probationary period, and so is no longer a probationer,
by tacking on prior service in the competitive service if: (1) The prior
service was rendered immediately preceding the probationary appointment;
(2) it was performed in the same agency; (3) it was performed in the same
line of work; and (4) it was completed with no more than one break in service
of less than 30 days. 5
C.F.R. § 315.802(b); Ellefson
v. Department of the Army, 98 M.S.P.R. 191, (2005).
Alternatively,
an employee can show that, while he may be a probationer, he is an “employee”
with Chapter 75 appeal rights because, immediately preceding the adverse
action, he had completed at least one year of current continuous service
in the competitive service without a break in federal civilian employment
of a workday. Ellefson,
98 M.S.P.R. 191, decision
(PERMERICA.COM)
|
||
| 08-04:.DOLLY SINGS THE BLUES (Soulful Side of Ms. Parton):. | ||
| 07-31:.CAN A PROMOTION ACTION BE EFFECTED RETROACTIVELY? PRIOR TO THE DATE APPROVED BY THE PERSONNEL DIRECTOR? She Filed A Complaint To OPM Because She Felt That She Had A Right To A Retroactive Promotion: The claimant is requesting that the effective date of her promotion, from a GS-0511-11 to a GS-0511-12, be changed from May 7, 2000 to April 9, 2000 and she subsequently be paid retroactively. The claimant provides documentation, showing that her supervisor recommended her for promotion to the GS-12 level on February 11, 2000. According to the claimant and her supervisor, she was eligible for this promotion on April 9, 2000. However, based on a copy of the personnel action, [the claimant's] promotion was not made effective until May 7, 2000. [The claimant] contends that the personnel office's tracking report showed that the personnel office received the personnel action on February 28, 2000; however, it was "lost in the mail" and not processed until May 11, 2000. The agency agrees that the personnel action was electronically received on February 28, 2000. However, the agency's "authorized approving official" did not approve the promotion request prior to April 9, 2000 and, therefore, the agency contends that they cannot retroactively effect her promotion to that date. ..OPM decision Save This For Your Records*.PERMISS.*.PERMISS-TABLE.*.Comp Gen Briefs | ||
| 07-31:.REVERSED! - EEO DISCRIMINATION? - SHE HAD BREAST CANCER: Ms. Adams, a candidate for the United States Foreign Service, passed the required entrance examinations and received a medical clearance, only to learn thereafter that she had been diagnosed with stage-one breast cancer. Upon hearing the news, the State Department, expressing concern that many of its overseas posts lack the follow-up care it believed Adams required, revoked her medical clearance, disqualifying her from the Foreign Service. Adams sued under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits federal agencies from discriminating in employment against disabled individuals -- including those with a "record of a disability, 29 U.S.C. § 705(20)(B)(ii). In her complaint, she alleged that her surgical treatment rendered her cancer-free and able to work anywhere in the world without requiring specialized follow-up care. Without allowing discovery, the district court granted summary judgment to the State Department, concluding among other things that Adams had no record of a disability as defined in the statute. For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we reverse... the decision | ||
07-24:.IS
IT ILLEGAL AND/OR A VIOLATION OF THE PRIVACY ACT FOR A FEDERAL AGENCY OFFICIAL
TO DISCLOSE DISCIPLINE/ADVERSE ACTION INFORMATION TO A PERSPECTIVE FEDERAL
EMPLOYER IN ANOTHER AGENCY? CAUTION:
THE FOLLOWING INFO IS FOR HR OFFICIALS ONLY!
CAUTION: IMPROPER INFORMATION RELEASE CAN LEAD TO ADVERSE ACTION CAUTION: CHECK WITH AGENCY HR/ER OFFICIALS PRIOR TO RELEASING INFORMATION [TEXT] ... [PDF] ... EMAIL COMMENTS TO:PERMERICA@AOL.COM ... |
||
| 07-17:.OPM DIRECTOR BAILING OUT EARLY: To Cash In On Lucrative Private Sector Position. . here | ||
| 07-17:.TO BREACH OR NOT TO BREACH A LAST CHANCE AGREEMENT:.ARMY Removed Him. He Entered Into A Last Chance Agreement. ARMY Removed him when he violated the "LCA" . He appealed to MSPB. The MSPB initial decision (He Did Not Violate The LCA) Reversed the Removal. The MSPB Full Board decision (He Did Violate The LCA) reversed the reversal and sustained ARMY's removal. On Appeal, The FedCir decision (MSPB Full Board Used Different Criteria to Weigh The LCA Violation than Originally Used By The Agency) Appears Poised To Un-Reverse the Reversed Reversal. . the decision | ||
| 07-16:.BREACH OF LAST CHANCE AGREEMENT? .DVA Rendered A Decision To Remove Her. She Entered Into A Last Chance Agreement With DVA. The Agency Removed her citing violation of the "LCA" . She appealed to MSPB. NOTE: the Board (MSPB) lacks jurisdiction to review a removal based on violation of a Last Chance Agreement unless the appellant proves that: (1) he/she complied with the LCA; (2) the agency breached the LCA; or (3) he/she involuntarily entered into the LCA. See Buchanan v. Dep’t of Energy, 247 F.3d 1333, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2001).. the decision | ||
| 07-15:.PUBLICLY AVAILABLE INFO ON FEDERAL EMPLOYEES: -.5 CFR 293.311 | ||
| 07-15:.FLRA TRAINING: -.“Significant Developments in FLRA Case Law 2007 – 2008” July 30 and August 27HERE | ||
| 07-09:.MSPB:.OWCP TRUMPS AWOL REMOVAL. Removal Reversed Due To Positive OWCP Decision. An adverse action based on a charge of AWOL cannot be sustained if OWCP determines that the employee was entitled to compensation benefits as a result of a work-related injury for the entire time period charged as AWOL. Brown, 92 M.S.P.R. 95,.and .Satterfield, 80 M.S.P.R. 132... Recent Decision | ||
| 07-02:.DISCLAIMER: PERMERICA.COM IS AN INDEPENDENT NON-GOVERNMENTAL WEBSITE | ||
| 07-04:.YOURS TRULY, JOHNNY DOLLAR: .INVESTIGATION SKILLS: PERMERICA.COM will run a new 5-part series each week, Mon-Fri. Listen during break or lunch. 15 minutes each.. (CLICK PLAYER ABOVE ^) - NEW SERIES NEXT WEEK - | ||
| 07-02:.DRAFT SUPERVISORY POSITION EVALUATION GUIDE & FAQ..<-CLASSIFICATION SECTION | ||
|
COPYRIGHT 1995 - 2008 PERMERICA.COM. ALL RIGHTS ARE RESERVED |
|
|
CLICK HERE .
|
COPYRIGHT 1995 - 2008 PERMERICA.COM. ALL RIGHTS ARE RESERVED