P  E  R  M  E  R  I  C  A  .  C O M

FLRA      FSIP      EEOC      MSPB      VA OIG

Movie A star Is Born Animation
       MAX  OUT   YOUR   T.  S.  P.  CONTRIBUTIONS      
       OPM   DIRECTOR   RESIGNS      
Movie A star Is Born Animation  HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
TO  RETURN  AFTER  NOVEMBER  ELECTIONS  Movie A star Is Born Animation
  OTIS RUSH         
  BUDDY GUY         
  KOKO TAYLOR         
  BIG  MAYBELLE        
  ALBERT KING           B.B. KING           FREDDY KING
  BIG  TIME  SARAH        
  JUNIOR  WELLS         
  LITTLE  WALTER         

"End Of The Road Medley PT 1 of 4"
( 2 mb )
Samsung Galaxy Book2

"End Of The Road Medley PT 2 of 4"
( 2 mb )

☀       October 20, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Export-Import Bank v. AFGE  ...    In this case, the Authority must address an issue that has not recently come before it. The Agency filed a petition under § 2422.1(b)(2) of the Authority’s Regulations[1] alleging that it has a good faith doubt, based on objective considerations, that the currently recognized labor organization represents a majority of the employees in the existing unit (good faith doubt).[2]     The Regional Director (RD) found that the Agency failed to demonstrate a good faith doubt and dismissed the Agency’s petition. The Agency now files an application for review of that decision.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       October 19, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Labor  v. AFGE  ...   PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEES, TERM APPOINTEES AND SIMILAR TIME-LIMITED APPOINTEES MAY NOT FILE GRIEVANCES CHALLENGING AN AGENCY’S DECISION CONCERNING EXTENDING, CONVERTING, OR ENDING THEIR EMPLOYMENT.  ...   The issue in this case is whether a student intern (the grievant) serving under a term appointment may grieve the Agency’s decision not to convert her to a permanent position at the end of her appointment.     Although Arbitrator Salvatore J. Arrigo found that the Agency had violated the grievant’s contractual and statutory due-process rights in processing her “termination,”[1] we find that the Arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to resolve the grievance in the first place.     And we take this opportunity to clarify that, like probationary employees, term appointees and similar time-limited appointees may not file grievances challenging an agency’s decision concerning extending, converting, or ending their employment.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       Oct 15, 2018  ...  FLRA:  VA v. AFGE ..  The Union grieved the Agency’s failure to process union dues-deduction forms for its bargaining‑unit employees.     Arbitrator Garvin Lee Oliver found that the Agency violated the parties’ agreement and 5 U.S.C. §§ 7115(a), and 7116(a)(1) and (8) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Statute)[1] when it did not process the forms in a timely manner.     The Arbitrator awarded several remedies, but the Agency challenges only the remedial posting ordered by the Arbitrator. On this point, the Agency argues that the Arbitrator exceeded his authority by addressing a statutory violation that the Union did not present at arbitration.  ..  DECISION:  (pdf)   (html)

☀       Oct 15, 2018  ...  D.D.C.:  Iglesias v. USAID  ...   The United States Agency for International Development, Office of Inspector General (“USAID-OIG”), recommended firing one of its auditors, Likza Iglesias, after an investigation prompted by an anonymous complaint determined she intentionally had submitted false claims for reimbursement.     Iglesias contested USAID-OIG’s decision, claiming that any inaccuracies in her submissions were unintentional and that the anonymous complaint, the investigation, and her proposed removal from the Foreign Service were retaliation for two audit findings she had made, both of which she claimed were protected disclosures under the Whistleblower Protection Act.     The Foreign Service Grievance Board (“FSGB” or “Board”) upheld USAID-OIG’s recommendation, concluding that Iglesias intentionally had submitted false claims and that there was no evidence of any connection between the audit disclosures and the subsequent investigation or her proposed removal.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)


☀       Oct 12, 2018  ...  D.D.C.:  Pendergrass v. WMATA  ...   Mr. Pendergrass is an African-American male. He applied for a position as a Bus Operator with WMATA in the fall of 2017 and received a contingent offer of employment from WMATA on October 6, 2017.      First Choice Background Company performed his background check. On November 17, 2017, WMATA notified Mr. Pendergrass that he was ineligible for employment due to his prior conviction for a non-violent offense.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)


☀        1878 - 2018 LYNCHING PLAYBOOK ... Same Unsubstantiated Sex Claim ... Same Lynch Mob "hang him, he's a monster" ... Same Political Party   "no evidence needed".

☀        TWO NEW DIRT-CHEAP BLU PHONES COMING SOON ...   $99 BLU STUDIO MEGA (2018) has a 6 inch display.   $50 BLU ADVANCE L4 has a 4 inch display.    These newly announced BLU unlocked phones are not available yet, but soon from Amazon, MicroCenter, Frys, Etc.    Phones run Android Oreo 8.    Low-specked and low-priced.

☀       Oct 9, 2018  ...  N.M.C.C.A.:  US (Navy) v. Bess  ...   X-RAY TECH THOUGHT HE WAS BARRY WHITE:   "TAKE IT OFF"  ...   The appellant is an x-ray technician who was assigned to the Naval Air Station Oceana Branch Health Clinic (Oceana Clinic), Virginia Beach, Virginia.     While in the performance of his duties at the clinic in February 2011, the appellant told female patient, PG, that she had to be naked while he took her x-rays. PG complied by removing her clothing, and the appellant purportedly took x-rays of her.     The appellant appeared to take x-rays of the woman in several positions while she was completely naked.     These positions included having PG lay on her stomach and stick her buttocks in the air and get into a “frog-like position.”   The positions completely exposed PG’s naked vaginal area to the appellant.  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       Oct 9, 2018  ...  FLRA:  SBA v. AFGE  ...   LABOR RELATIONS SPECIALISTS ... TAKE HEED:      TELL AFGE      "NO MO TEMP PROMO"  ...   The Union filed a grievance on behalf of thirty‑one employees (the grievants) alleging that, on an “ongoing” basis, the Agency violated Article 27, Section 1 (Article 27-1) and Article 31, Section 4 (Article 31-4) of the parties’ collective‑bargaining agreement.[3] Article 27-1 allows employees to file a grievance if they believe that their position descriptions are not accurate.      Article 31-4 states that if the Agency details an employee to a higher-graded position for more than thirty days, it will temporarily promote the employee to that position on the thirty-first day.      In this case, we apply the recently announced rule for whether a grievance impermissibly involves classification under § 7121(c)(5) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute),[1] and we determine that the dispute at issue, for thirty-one grievants, is barred.      Therefore, we find that the Union’s claim fails to allege that the Agency expressly assigned the grievants the duties of any specific higher-graded positions, and we find that the grievance involved classification.[25] Accordingly, we conclude that § 7121(c)(5) bars the grievance, and we set aside the interim award as contrary to law.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       Oct 5, 2018  ...  10th Cir.:  Payan v. UPS  ...   Mr. Payan, who is Hispanic, has worked for United Parcel Service (“UPS”) since 1991. He worked his way through the ranks and in 2006 was promoted to Security Manager of the Desert Mountain Salt Lake City Division.     Around 2009, Charles Martinez, also Hispanic, became the supervisor of UPS’s Great Basin District, which encompassed the Salt Lake City security division. This made Mr. Martinez Mr. Payan’s direct supervisor.     Mr. Payan was considered a “Ready Now” candidate until Mr. Martinez informed him in early 2010 that he no longer considered him to be “ready now.” UPS uses the “Ready Now” list to determine candidates for promotions, so Mr. Payan’s removal from the list meant that he could no longer be considered for promotions.     Charles Payan appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of UPS in relation to his claims for racial discrimination and retaliation. .  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       Oct 4, 2018  ...  Fed. Cir.:  Jolley v. MSPB  ...   Mr. Jolley is a preference-eligible veteran who served with the U.S. Air Force for nine years before being honor- ably discharged in 1959. Mr. Jolley is also a former employee of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). In 2008, HUD transferred Mr. Jolley from his GS-15 Operations Specialist position in Jacksonville, Florida, to a GS-15 Field Office Director position in Boise, Idaho. He retired on March 31, 2010.     In 2017, Mr. Jolley applied for two HUD vacancies and was not selected to fill either vacancy. On September 27, 2017, Mr. Jolley filed an appeal with the Board alleg- ing that: (1) HUD, as reprisal for Mr. Jolley’s pre-2008 allegations that HUD had violated USERRA when it in 2008 reassigned him from Jacksonville, Florida, to Boise, Idaho; and (2) HUD’s use of “dual announcements” in the two vacancies Mr. Jolley applied for in 2017 violated USERRA and VEOA by failing to fairly evaluate his applications for those vacancies.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       Oct 4, 2018  ...  Fed. Cir.:  Ogburn v. MSPB  ...   Launa Golddeen Ogburn (“Ogburn”) appeals from the decision of the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (the “Board”), dismissing her appeal for lack of jurisdiction.     BACKGROUND    Ogburn was employed with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (“ODNI”) as the Executive Sup- port Assistant until her retirement on or around October 7, 2012. In May 2012, the Office of Personnel Manage- ment (“OPM”) issued a letter informing Ogburn of its approval of her disability retirement application under the Federal Employees Retirement System (“FERS”).     In August 2016, after Ogburn’s request for an explanation of her benefits, OPM issued a letter explaining the computa- tion of her FERS annuity and a breakdown of her retire- ment benefit calculations. On June 20, 2017, OPM issued an initial decision concerning, inter alia, her FERS disa- bility retirement formula and computation, cost of living allowance adjustments, and “profile” and case status. R.A. 28–32.     Upon Ogburn’s request for reconsideration, OPM issued its final decision on October 31, 2017, affirm- ing its June 20, 2017 initial decision. On November 21, 2017, Ogburn appealed OPM’s final decision to the Board.  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

MICROSOFT SURFACE REFRESH :    Microsoft unveiled refreshes to some Surface computers. The Surface Pro, Surface Laptop and Surface Studio computers received upgraded CPUs, GPUs, storage and memory. The outsides were largely unchanged.   All three computers also received a new all black finish option.   The all black Surface Pro is stunning especially when paired with the black keyboard. The LTE version of the recently announced Surface Go was not announced at the event.   A new lower priced black Surface Pro6 base model with 8GB Ram memory, Intel Core i5 CPU, 128GB SSD storage and Windows 10 Home OS costs $899. ($999 with black keyboard)   Sweet !!!     PCMAG

MEN ARE PRESUMED GUILTY ?    Experienced Prosecutors Find The Case To Be Flimsy And Ultimately Too Weak To Prosecute. ... Other Prosecutors Disagree.

☀       Oct 2, 2018  ...  AFCCA:  U.S. v. Harrington  ...   HOT MILITARY SEX GAMES: WHAT SHE DID SOBER ... BEFORE HER DRUNKEN SEX VICTIM CLAIM.  ...   In January 2016, Appellant and Senior Airman (SrA) FC were co-workers stationed at Creech Air Force Base (AFB), Nevada. On 30 January 2016, SrA FC and her then-boyfriend agreed to end their relationship. Later that day, SrA FC attended a party at the off-base residence of another co-worker, Staff Sergeant (SSgt) KW.     Appellant and several other individuals, mostly Airmen, also attended the party. SrA FC’s recently-estranged boyfriend and Appellant’s wife did not attend. SrA FC and Appellant had no prior sexual relationship.      Appellant, SrA FC, and several others played adult party games.      Of note, one game was an “adult” or “drinking” version of Jenga that involved removing individual blocks from a tower of blocks. In the version of the game they played, each block had an instruction printed on it for the participant to perform, often of a titillating nature—for example, removing an article of clothing or electing to take a “body shot” of alcohol from a location on another player’s body. In the course of the game, SrA FC removed her pants, and Appellant elected to take “body shots” from SrA FC’s mouth, from her cleavage, and from between her buttocks. SrA FC permitted Appellant to do so.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       Oct 2, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Justice (Prisons) v. AFGE  ...   In this case, we are once again called upon to examine the reach and outer limits of a negotiated grievance procedure. Specifically, we must decide whether those procedures can reach into decisions concerning the medical competency of an intern training to become a clinical psychologist.     Arbitrator Stephen Fischer found that the Agency violated the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement, American Psychology Association (APA) regulations, Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Center regulations, and Agency rules and program statements when it refused to issue the intern a certificate of completion at the end of a doctoral internship. As a remedy, the Arbitrator ordered the Agency to pay the intern $1,288,500 in front pay—the twenty‑five year difference in median wages between a psychologist and a mental health counselor.     The main question before us is whether the complaint[2] filed by the Union constitutes a “grievance” as that term is defined by the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Statute).   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       Oct 2, 2018  ...  FLRA:  SBA v. AFGE  ...   Over the span of only a few months, the Union filed two grievances. The first grievance alleged that the Agency violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the parties’ agreement when it designated bargaining-unit employees as FLSA‑exempt, and so failed to properly pay overtime to the grievants. The second grievance alleged that the Agency failed to fully participate in the first grievance. The parties hired Arbitrator Andrée Y. McKissick to resolve the second grievance. On May 14, 2016, Arbitrator McKissick found that the second grievance was arbitrable and she unilaterally assumed jurisdiction over the first grievance. She then issued a number of subsequent orders and awards.     The Agency has filed two sets of exceptions:   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀        Oct 01, 2018  ...  FLRA:  AFGE  v. VA   (pdf)   (html)        Air Force  v. AFGE   (pdf)   (html)        Justice  v. AFGE   (pdf)   (html)

☀       Sep 28, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Defense  v. FEA   (pdf)   (html)        Air Force  v. AFGE   (pdf)   (html)        VA  v. AFGE   (pdf)   (html)

☀       Sep 27, 2018  ...  FLRA:  NAVY (Norfolf) v. IBPO  ...   Earlier this year the Authority set aside the award in U.S. Department of the Navy, Navy Region Mid‑Atlantic, Norfolk, Virginia (Navy).[1] In that decision, the Authority reviewed and corrected its interpretation of § 7116(d)[2] to hue closer to the plain terms of the Statute so that parties could no longer avoid the Statute’s choice-of-forum provision through artful pleadings.     The Union now files a motion for reconsideration of Navy under § 2429.17 of the Authority’s Regulations.[3]     The question before us is whether the Union has established extraordinary circumstances that warrant reconsideration of Navy.    DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       Sep 27, 2018  ...  6th Cir.:  Bullington v.  Bedford Cty  ...   FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS, WE VACATE THE DISTRICT COURT’S JUDGMENT.  ...   Plaintiff Kaleena Bullington (“Bullington”) worked as a dispatcher at the Bedford County Sherriff’s Department (“Department”) for over eight years.     Sometime during this period, Bullington had Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, a form of cancer, which she treated with chemotherapy. The chemotherapy, however, caused neuropathy and scar tissue in Bullington’s lungs, so Bullington needed additional treatment.     Because of her diagnosis and treatment, Bullington asserts that the Department treated her differently than the other employees.     Bullington brought this suit in the district court and alleged four causes of action in her second amended complaint:     The district court granted judgment on the pleadings to Defendants Bedford County, Tennessee (“Defendants”).  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       Sep 27, 2018  ...  Cal. Ct. App.:  Sumner v. Simpson University  ...   ARE CHURCHES FREE TO DISCRIMINATE AT WILL ?  ...   “The First Amendment guarantees to a religious institution the right to decide matters affecting its ministers’ employment, free from the scrutiny and second-guessing of the civil courts.”     The so-called ministerial exception is “a ‘nonstatutory, constitutionally compelled’ exception to federal civil rights legislation. [Citation.] The idea is that the law should not be construed to govern the relationship of a church and its ministers.”     The Supreme Court has concluded that the ministerial exception bars a minister’s employment discrimination suit based on the church’s decision to fire her.     The Supreme Court has not decided whether the exception bars a breach of contract or tort action.     That is the issue we decide in this case. COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       Sep 26, 2018  ...  FLRA:  VA (Denver) v. AFGE  ...   LIKE THE 5 STAIRSTEPS SAID ... "You Waited Too Long"  ...   The Regional Director of the Denver Region of the Federal Labor Relations Authority issued three unfair‑labor‑practice (ULP) complaints alleging that the Respondent violated §§ 7102 and 7116(a)(1) and (2) of the Federal Service Labor‑Management Relations Statute (Statute)[1] by investigating a Union steward’s use of official time, conducting an investigation into the steward’s meeting with an employee, and suspending the steward for two days.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 26, 2018  ...  FLRA:  IUPEDJ v. PBGC  ...   In this case we must address, yet once again, the Respondent Union’s (the Union’s) long-standing attempts to evade certain provisions in a binding collective‑bargaining agreement (CBA) and a binding memorandum of agreement (MOA) concerning the selection of arbitrators.[1] We adopt, with only slight modification, the recommend decision and order of Chief Administrative Law Judge Charles R. Center (Judge)[2] that found the Union had engaged in such “reprehensible behavior” before various arbitrators, who had comprised the pool for the negotiated grievance procedure for their agreement, that the Union committed more than one unfair labor practice (ULP).  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)


☀       September 25, 2018  ...  DcDc:  Furey v. Mnuchin (Treasury)  ...   Plaintiff, Helen Furey, identifies herself as a fifty-year old Asian woman of Chinese national origin.     She began working for the Department of Treasury on January 31, 2010 as an IT Specialist in the Department Offices Operations division of the Office of the Chief Information Officer.     This case arises out of plaintiff Helen Furey’s termination from her employment as an Information Technology (“IT”) Specialist at the United States Department of Treasury.     Plaintiff claims that the agency violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act when it subjected her to a hostile work environment; discriminated against her based on her race, national origin, and age; and retaliated against her for engaging in protected activity under both statutes.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 24, 2018  ...  3rd Cir.:  Marley v. Postal  ...   Mary-Ellen Marley, who was a long-time employee of the United States Postal Service, initially filed a ten-count complaint against the Postal Service and the Postmaster General.     The District Court granted the Postmaster’s motion, concluding that Marley had not established a prima facie case of retaliation, as she had not proffered evidence that showed that adverse employment actions taken against her were caused by any of her protected activity.     Mary-Ellen Marley appeals the order of the United States District Court.  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 21, 2018  ...  DcDc:  Raven v. U.S. (Smithsonian)  ...   “TOO ‘PRO-TRUMP,’” “TOO POLITICAL” “NOT NEUTRAL ENOUGH,”  ...   Artist Julian Raven brought this action against the United States and senior leaders of the National Portrait Gallery over the Gallery’s refusal to exhibit his portrait of then-President-elect Donald Trump.     Mr. Raven claims that the decision was motivated by political bias, violating his rights under the First and Fifth Amendments.     He may be right about the motivation, but he is wrong about the law.  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 20, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Navy v. NAIL  ...   Arbitrator Edward B. Valverde issued an award finding that the Agency was required to pay an employee (the grievant) certain overtime.     The Arbitrator interpreted Article 30, Section 5 of the parties’ agreement (Article 30) as mandating the overtime, despite the fact that U.S. Department of Defense Instruction 1400.25‑V810 (the Instruction) prohibits it.     Because the Arbitrator’s interpretation of Article 30 is irrational and implausible, we find that the award fails to draw its essence from the parties’ agreement.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 18, 2018  ...  9th Cir.:  Taylor v. BNSF  ...   Casey Taylor alleges in part that his prospective employer, BNSF Railway Company (BNSF), discriminated against him in violation of the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD) when it perceived him to be physically impaired and, as a result, withdrew his employment offer. This appeal raises an important question of Washington law: whether and when obesity qualifies as an “impairment”.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 18, 2018  ...  5th Cir.:  King v. State of LA   ...   AFRICAN-AMERICAN ... QUALIFIED FOR THE POSITION ... NOT SELECTED.  ...   Angela Roberson-King worked as a rehabilitation counselor at Louisiana Rehabilitation Services (LRS), a division of Louisiana’s Office of Workforce Development. In 2014, she applied to become a district supervisor at LRS. She interviewed for the position but did not receive it.     Roberson-King then sued LRS in federal district court, alleging that she was denied a promotion because of her race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and Louisiana tort law.     It is undisputed that Roberson-King has established a prima facie case of employment discrimination. She is African-American and was qualified for the district supervisor position.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 14, 2018  ...  FLRA:  AFGE v. Homeland (Glynco)  ...   Arbitrator James M. Klein awarded the Union attorney fees but reduced the requested amount. The main question before us is whether that award is contrary to law because, according to the Union, the Arbitrator failed to make specific findings to support the reduction.       BACKGROUND:   The Agency removed an employee (the grievant) from employment for misconduct, and the grievant appealed the action to the MSPB. Months later, the Agency notified the MSPB that it intended to rescind the grievant’s removal and return him to work. As a result, the MSPB dismissed the grievant’s appeal without prejudice to his right to refile it if the Agency failed to return him to his previous position.     On March 25, 2015 – shortly after the Agency rescinded the grievant’s removal – the Agency proposed to suspend the grievant for fourteen days for the same alleged misconduct that gave rise to the rescinded removal. Thereafter, the grievant refiled his MSPB appeal concerning the removal, and the MSPB ordered the grievant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as moot.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 14, 2018  ...  11th Cir.:  Koeppel v. Valencia College  ...   WHAT HIS HEARTS WANTS    &    WHAT HER BOYFRIEND DON'T.  ...   Jeffrey Koeppel met Jane Roe (pseudonym) during the summer of 2014 when they were assigned to the same biology lab group at Valencia College, a public college in Florida. Because they were assigned to work together, they exchanged phone numbers and would occasionally talk outside of class. As the semester went on, the 42-year-old Koeppel began to develop feelings for the 24- year-old Jane that were not purely academic.     A few days before the fall semester began, Koeppel saw something online that made him think that Jane was single. Ever hopeful, on August 3 he sent her a text message telling her once again that he had feelings for her: “So im saying I am interest[ed] in you . . .     Jane Roe sent the following reply text: I have told you that I just want this to be class related [because] I am with someone who I’ve been seeing for 3 years now . . And we live together . . So I don’t know if i gave you the wrong impression or whatever the case may be . . But I do have a serious [boyfriend] and really just thought we were studying and getting through the class.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 13, 2018  ...  DcDc:  Hillier v. CIA  ...    For the past six years, Mr. Hillier has sought records that he believes DHS, Department of State, and CIA possess. His quest began in early 2012 when he sent letters to these agencies asking whether certain record systems contained records about him.     Each agency processed Hillier’s requests under both the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. §552.     But none of the agencies provided records to Hillier because (1) none were found, (2) the relevant record systems were statutorily exempt from the Privacy Act and FOIA, or (3) the CIA could neither confirm nor deny the existence of records that might reveal a classified relationship with the agency.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 12, 2018  ...  DcDc:  Deppner v. Spectrum  ...   UNCROSS YOUR LEGS "HONEY BUNNY" SO I CAN CHECK FOR BED BUGS.  ...   Ms. Deppner brings these Title VII and District of Columbia Human Rights Act (DCHRA) actions against her former employer, Spectrum Healthcare Resources, asserting that it discriminated against her based on national origin, subjected her to a hostile work environment, and retaliated against her for engaging in protected activity.     Ms. Deppner also brings a DCHRA action against her former supervisor, Jerl Huling, in his individual capacity, asserting that he did the same.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 12, 2018  ...  7th Cir.:  Frey v. Hotel Coleman  ...   Vaughn hired the plaintiff, Bogustawa Frey, in August 2008, to work in the Hotel’s guest services department. Frey alleged that, shortly after Vaughn hired her, he began to sub‐ ject her to unwelcome and inappropriate sexual comments and advances.     According to Frey, Vaughn subjected her to comments such as the following: he could have any woman he wanted; she should put a penny in a jar every time she had sex with her husband; she had a sexy body. He also asked her if he could touch her stomach, invited her to join him in a hotel room, and told her he wanted to have phone sex with her. Frey objected to the comments and complained to the housekeeping manager, but when that manager informed Vaughn, he laughed off the complaints and the behavior went unchecked.     After Frey informed Vaughn that she was pregnant (in June 2009), Vaughn reduced her hours on the schedule, rescinded a promise he had made to promote her to a sales manager position with a much higher salary, assigned her to work the night shift without paying her the extra amount normally associated with that position, failed to consider her for a front desk position which would have paid an additional $3 per hour, and asked her to perform duties that she complained were difficult for her due to her pregnancy.     He also told her that her pregnancy would ruin her sexy body and that her sex life with her husband was over.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 11, 2018  ...  3rd Cir.:  Long v. SEPTA  ...   This case raises again the frequently-litigated question of whether violation of a statute—here, the Fair Credit Reporting Act—is an injury in fact that satisfies the Constitution’s “case or controversy” requirement.     BACKGROUND:  The complaint alleges the following facts. The three named plaintiffs were convicted of drug offenses in the relatively distant past: Michael White in 2006 and 2007, Joseph Shipley in 2001, and Frank Long in 1997. More recently, Plaintiffs applied to Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) for jobs that involved operating vehicles. Each Plaintiff filled out a form disclosing his criminal history and authorizing SEPTA to obtain a background check. Initially, Plaintiffs’ job applications seemed to meet with success: each received an offer or was given information about when to start training.     Ultimately, though, SEPTA denied employment to Plaintiffs.  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 11, 2018  ...  7th Cir.:  EEOC v. COSTCO  ...   Dawn Suppo, an employee of Costco Wholesale Corporation, was stalked by Thad Thompson, a customer of Costco, for over a year.     Things got so bad at the end that Suppo secured a plenary no-contact order from an Illinois state court.     Traumatized by the experience, she also took an unpaid medical leave, and when she didn’t come back, Costco terminated her employment.     The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued Costco on Suppo’s behalf, alleging that Costco had subjected her to a hostile work environment by tolerating Thompson’s harassment. After the jury rendered a verdict in the EEOC’s favor, Costco moved for judgment as a matter of law and the EEOC moved for backpay. The district court denied both motions, and both parties appeal.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 10, 2018  ...  2d Cir.:  Osby v. New York ...  Appellant Tammy S. Osby, proceeding pro se, appeals the District Court’s judgment dismissing her claims against her employer, the New York City Department of Probation (“DOP”), for disability discrimination and retaliation. She alleged that after she underwent knee surgery in 2012, the DOP discriminated against her in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”),{}... and that it then unlawfully retaliated against her for filing complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). .  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 7, 2018  ...  DcDc:  Franklin v. Capitol Hilton Hotel ...  Plaintiff puts forth allegations that he was improperly terminated from employment based on his disability. He alleges that suffers from diabetes ketoacidosis.     He claims that he was fired for “job abandonment;” however, he further alleges that he was in the hospital, and that Defendant was aware of his circumstances and condition.     He posits that he was informed that he could return to work, though he was still experiencing some health complications. Plaintiff alleges that he was unfairly removed from his position under the guise of lack of attendance when it was, in fact, solely related to his disability.  ...  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 6, 2018  ...  11th Cir.:  Jones v. Aaron's Inc.  ...   Plaintiff Rosana Jones alleged that her former employer, Aaron’s Inc, terminated her because of her disability and in retaliation for exercising her rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and (2) interfered with her rights under the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) and retaliated against her for exercising those rights.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 5, 2018  ...  FLRA:  VA (Dayton) v. NNU ...  The grievant is a registered nurse. A patient’s wife reported that the grievant verbally abused the patient (the allegation). An Agency Administrative Investigation Board (Investigation Board) investigated the allegation and recommended that the Agency terminate the grievant. The Agency did so. The Union filed a grievance alleging that the termination violated the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement because the Agency lacked just cause.    ...    In this case, we find that we do not have jurisdiction over exceptions to an arbitration award concerning the termination of an employee appointed to the Agency under 38 U.S.C. § 7401(1).  ..  DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       September 5, 2018  ...  FLRA:  IRS v. NTEU  ...   In this case, we revisit those circumstances which will be considered “extraordinary” under which the Authority will address interlocutory appeals. We determine that we will consider an interlocutory exception that raises a defect which, if resolved, will advance the ultimate disposition of the case.     Arbitrator M. David Vaughn issued an award finding the Union’s grievance arbitrable and finding that the Agency violated the parties’ agreement when it delayed approving quality step increases (QSIs). As a remedy, the Arbitrator ordered the parties to negotiate a settlement reconsidering the policy of delaying the approval of QSIs. The Agency filed exceptions to the award.     As pertinent, the Agency argues that the award failed to draw its essence from the parties’ agreement because, despite finding that the grievance was one day late, the Arbitrator found that the grievance was arbitrable. Because the Arbitrator’s interpretation of the parties’ agreement evidences a manifest disregard of that agreement, we grant this exception and vacate the award.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)



☀       September 4, 2018  ...  NSC:  Brown v. NRWMC ..  Melinda J. Brown appeals from an order of the district court granting summary judgment in favor of Regional West Medical Center (RWMC) and dismissing her complaint for employment discrimination and retaliatory discharge.    Brown was employed by RWMC as a customer service representative in the patient financial services department. On August 16, 2011, Brown fell in the parking lot of RWMC as she was leaving work, injuring her right hand and wrist. She reported for work the following day, but was instructed to seek medical care shortly after she arrived. Brown notified RWMC of the injury and made a workers’ compensation claim. Despite being cleared to work with certain restrictions as of March 21, 2012, she has not returned to work since that day.    On December 16, 2011, Brown delivered a letter which indicatedt hat she had “limited use of [her] Right hand,” and requested the fol- lowing accommodation: “Want a job that I can come back to after I am cleared by my Doctor . . . .”  ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 31, 2018  ...  FLRA:  VA v. AFGE  ...   In this case, after the conclusion of performance year 2014 (PY 14), the Agency “curved” the productivity standard for the highest performance level of a critical element.     The Union filed a grievance because the Agency implemented the change or curve without bargaining.     The Union also grieved the performance review of one employee. Arbitrator Sandra Mendel Furman denied the grievance concerning the performance review, but found that the Agency had violated the parties’ agreement by not bargaining before it implemented the curve.     The Agency challenges as nonfacts the Arbitrator’s findings.  ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 31, 2018  ...  DcDc:  Nurriddin v. Perez  ...   Plaintiff Ahmad B. Nurriddin, proceeding pro se, is a former employee of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (“NASA”). He previously filed two separate lawsuits against NASA for unlawful employment discrimination, neither of which was ultimately successful. While pursuing his discrimination claims, Nurriddin also sought workers’ compensation from the federal government under the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (“FECA”). ..  COURT DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 30, 2018  ...  FLRA:  IRS v. NTEU  ...   On May 12, 2017, Arbitrator Michael Hill issued an award finding that the Agency violated the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement and a separate memorandum of understanding by failing to permit an employee (the grievant) to “opt out” of an involuntary reassignment to a different position.     The Arbitrator also found that another Agency employee (the volunteer) offered to take the grievant’s place in the new position.     As a remedy, the Arbitrator directed the Agency to permit the volunteer to work in the new position so that the grievant could return to her former position (the former position).     The main question before us is whether the Arbitrator’s award is contrary to management’s right to assign employees under § 7106(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Service Labor‑Management Relations Statute.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 29, 2018  ...  FLRA:  FOP v. AirForce  ...   Arbitrator William J. DiCindio found the Union’s grievance untimely, and thus not procedurally arbitrable under the parties’ agreement. There are three questions before us.    (1) Whether the Arbitrator’s finding that the grievance was untimely is contrary to law.   (2) Whether the Arbitrator’s determination that the grievance was untimely is based on nonfacts.   (3) Whether the award fails to draw its essence from the parties’ agreement.  ...  FLRA DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 28, 2018  ...  FLRA:  IRS v. NTEU  ...   In this case, we determine that the Arbitrator exceeded his authority when he determined that IRS managers could not consider discipline in performance awards determinations even though such consideration was authorized by Agency policy.  ...   DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 28, 2018  ...  FLRA:  VA v. AFGE  ...   The Federal Labor Relations Authority’s (FLRA) General Counsel GC’s complaint alleged that the VA violated § 7116(a)(1) and (5) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute),[1] by failing to bargain in good faith, when the VA refused to execute a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on which it had reached agreement with the Union.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

V. CONCLUSION    In their cross-motion for summary judgment, Defendants assert that the fact “that the President’s policy choices about how best to guide the conduct of e mployees in the Executive Branch do not align with Plaintiffs’ own policy preferences is not a proper basis for seeking judicial review.”         This is undoubtedly true. But the core claim that the Unions make in the context of the instant case is that the President’s policy choices as reflected in the challenged executive orders do not align with the policy preferences of Congress, and in this Court’s view, that contention is undoubtedly true as well.         In short, there is no dispute that the principle mission of the FSLMRS is to protect the collective bargaining rights of federal workers, based on Congress’s clear and unequivocal finding that “labor organizations and collective bargaining in the civil service are in the public interest.” 5 U.S.C. § 7101(a). Congress did not intend for union challenges to the validity of executive orders that threaten such collective bargaining rights to be funneled to the FLRA. Upon exercising its subject-matter jurisdiction over the ripe claims that the Unions bring here, this Court has concluded that many of the challenged provisions of the Orders at issue here effectively reduce the scope of the right to bargain collectively as Congress has crafted it, or impair the ability of agency officials to bargain in good faith as Congress has directed, and therefore cannot be sustained.

As a result, and as set forth in the accompanying Order, this Court will declare the following provisions invalid, and will enjoin the President’s subordinates from implementing or giving effect to:    Executive Order 13,836 §§ 5(a), 5( e), 6;     Executive Order 13,837 §§ 3(a), 4(a), 4(b); and     Executive Order 13,839 §§ 3, 4(a), 4(c).

What remains:   Executive Order 13,836 § 5(c);     Executive Order 13,837 §§ 2(j), 4(c); and     Executive Order 13,839 §§ 2(b), 2(c), 4(b)(iii), 7

are the few challenged directives that have neither reduced the scope of protected collective bargaining rights nor hampered good faith bargaining, and, thus, cannot be said to conflict with the FSLMRS. Furthermore, given these conclusions, the parties’ various cross -motions for summary judgment are GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.    (.pdf)   (.html)


☀       August 27, 2018  ...  DcDc:  Moore v. Castro (HUD)  ...   Mr. Moore, a former employee of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), is an African-American man over sixty-seven years old.     He alleges that while he was employed at HUD, the agency took adverse employment actions against him because of his race, sex, and age and in retaliation for filing a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”).   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 27, 2018  ...  CFed. Cir.:  Villareal  v. Prisons (FDC Houston)  ...   FIRED: LET FEMALE PRISONERS TAKE LEFTOVER COOKIES & EARLY SHOWERS.  ...   Villareal was employed by the Bureau of Prisons (the “Bureau”) from 2007 until his termination on May 23, 2016. Prior to his termination, Villareal had no disciplinary record and all of his supervisory evaluations were rated satisfactory or higher. In December 2012, while Villareal was a Senior Corrections Officer at the Federal Detention Center Houston (“FDC Houston”), the Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”) initiated an investigation focusing on Villareal’s relationship with two female inmates, Claudia Solis and Andee Santana, improper contact with Solis’s family, preferential treatment to- wards inmates, breach of computer security, and inattention to duty.     After a seven-month investigation, OIG issued a report concluding that Villareal violated several Bureau policies. The most significant finding in the report was that Villareal placed and failed to report several calls on his cellular phone to Solis’s family members. The report further concluded that Villareal had engaged in an inappropriate relationship with Solis and showed preferential treatment towards Solis and Santana by offering them leftover cookies, allowing them to take an early shower, and allowing them to distribute toiletries. Finally, the report stated that Villareal misused his work computer, failed to properly monitor inmates around computers, failed to properly secure his office, and made derogatory remarks to inmates.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 23, 2018  ...  6th Cir.:  Davis v. Fiat Chrysler  ...   Valerie Davis, an African-American woman, is a clay modeler who has worked for Fiat Chrysler Automobile US LLC (“FCA”) sculpting car models since 2000.1 In 2004, Davis submitted a letter to her EEOC representative at FCA complaining of actions she considered to be racial discrimination by her co-workers in her then-workspace, Studio 1.     Ms. Davis brought this hostile work environment claim against her employer (FCA).     Her complaints included that her supervisor made remarks about African-American employees’ “kinky hair,” that co-workers referred to her as “my little brown friend,” and that a co-worker would use a “‘monkey calling’ device every time [she] would walk by him.”     She also claims that she was called “chicky monkey” by her Studio 1 co-workers.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 22, 2018  ...  5th Cir.:  Griener v. US (DVA)  ...   Dr. Thayne Griener—a physician who worked part-time at a hospital operated by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”)—brought this action [...] claiming that his discharge by a VA hospital and its employees intentionally inflicted emotional distress upon him and tortiously interfered with his business relationships.  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 22, 2018  ...  FLRA:  SSA (Sacramento) v. AALJ (IFPTE)  ...   This case concerns approximately fifteen administrative law judges (ALJs) who hear and decide disability cases for the Social Security Administration (SSA) and twenty-five clerks who assist the ALJs with scheduling and preparing for hearings. The ALJs are expected to schedule a certain number of hearings each month. If they do not schedule an adequate number of hearings, they may lose privileges, such as telework and earning credit hours while teleworking.     Previously, a clerk was assigned to each ALJ, and worked exclusively for that ALJ.     In December 2015, the Respondent (SSA) announced that it was changing the way clerks were assigned work. Instead of working exclusively for an ALJ, they would be assigned to one of four teams: TRIM (telephone, reception, intake, and mail); Scheduling; Pre-hearing; and Post-hearing. The Respondent (SSA) explained that it had entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the union representing the clerks that allowed them to telework three days a week instead of one.     Shortly thereafter, the Charging Party AALJ (IFPTE) demanded to bargain. In January 2016, the Respondent (SSA) announced that it was implementing the change and that it had no duty to bargain with the Charging Party. The Charging Party AALJ (IFPTE) then filed this charge.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 21, 2018  ...  DcDc:  Braxton v. First Transit  ...   First Transit operates the D.C. Circulator bus system. Ms. Braxton began working as a bus operator for First Transit on August 26, 2014. First Transit terminated her on January 28, 2016, six days after an incident between Ms. Braxton and a disruptive passenger on her bus.     ACCORDING TO MS. BRAXTON’S INCIDENT REPORT: ... the disruptive passenger told her and the other passengers that bus rides should be free to African-Americans because of slavery and racial inequality. When the passenger asked Ms. Braxton if she agreed and confronted her about working for white people as an African-American, Ms. Braxton said that she was happy with her job. The passenger then chastised her in vulgar terms and told her that she would never accomplish anything or get anywhere by working for “the white man.” She told him that he could not tell her that, adding that she did not care who she worked for and was happy with her life.     After another passenger posted a recording of the incident on Twitter, First Transit placed Ms. Braxton on unpaid administrative leave pending an investigation into what it described as “an aggressive verbal confrontation with [a] passenger while operating the vehicle.     Teairra Braxton alleges that First Transit, Inc. fired her for complaining about a supervisor’s sexual harassment, failed to provide her proper union representation, and defamed her.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 17, 2018  ...  5th Cir.:  Jones v. Family Dollar  ...   LAWSUITS AMERICAN STYLE.  ...   In the early hours of July 19, 2015, Dalton Baham, III, was riding his motorcycle on Carrollton Avenue in New Orleans, Louisiana. At the I-10 underpass, he struck a red shopping cart abandoned in the middle of the road, lost control of his bike, and was thrown.     He was pronounced dead at the scene.     Family Dollar is a budget-friendly retail chain that has a store a few blocks from the scene of the accident. Family Dollar has red carts very similar to the one Baham struck. The abandoned cart had a specialized wheel manufactured by Gatekeeper Systems.     The Plaintiffs filed suit in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans against Family Dollar and Gatekeeper.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 16, 2018  ...  11th Cir.:  Little v. CRSA  ...   AS FOR THE DESCRIPTION OF HARASSMENT, SHE STATED:  ...   I am a female who has worked for [CRSA] since 2006 as Simulator Technician II/Safety Coordinator. I have been sexually harassed by [R N] (Lead Technician). I am being discriminated against because of my sex.     Beginning in May 2016, Norris has stated that I have a cute ass; told me that I look good in my jeans; asked me to wear dresses and heels to work so he could stand at the bottom of the ladder and watch me climb the ladder.     I am being discriminated against in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 15, 2018  ...  D.C. Cir.:  Ranowsky v. NRPC (Amtrak)  ...   In the midst of an extensive restructuring at the Office of the Inspector General for Amtrak, Ms. Ranowsky was fired from her job as Deputy Counsel.     Ranowsky claims that her termination was the product of discrimination based on her age and sex, in violation of [...]. She also claims that Amtrak later retaliated against her for filing her EEO complaint, and that two of its employees aided and abetted those violations.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 14, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Navy ( Bremerton) v. BMTC (Union)  ...   In this case, we vacate an award because the Arbitrator modified the terms of the parties’ agreement instead of interpreting the agreement.     Arbitrator Walter Kawecki, Jr. issued an award finding that the Agency had a nondiscretionary policy, established by past practice, of promoting apprentices every six months when they satisfied certain training and education requirements. He also found that this policy had been incorporated into Article 39 of the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement (Article 39).     Consequently, he found that the Agency violated Article 39 when it failed to timely promote one apprentice (the grievant) who had satisfied the requirements.     The main question before us is whether the award fails to draw its essence from the agreement.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 14, 2018  ...  8th Cir.:  Eggers v. Wells Fargo  ...   In 2005, Richard, then age 61, applied to work at Wells Fargo. On the job application, Wells Fargo required applicants to answer whether they had ever been convicted of any crime involving dishonesty or breach of trust. He answered “No,” and a name-based background check revealed no prior conviction. Wells Fargo subsequently hired Richard for its Home Mortgage division.     In 2010, Wells Fargo switched to a more sophisticated FBI fingerprint-based background check. The bank then ordered Richard’s division to undergo rescreening with the new system. Richard authorized the rescreen, and again he indicated that he had no prior convictions for crimes involving dishonesty or breach of trust.     However, the new background check showed that Richard ...   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 13, 2018  ...  D.C. Cir.:  Steele v. Mattis (Defense)  ...   The Department of Defense hired Dr. Brett Steele to teach at the National Defense University’s College of International Security Affairs. During his probationary first year of instruction, the College decided to terminate his contract. Dr. Steele filed suit, asserting that his contract was ended because of his age. The district court granted summary judgment to the Department of Defense. Because the Department has failed to provide a consistent and sufficient explanation for Dr. Steele’s discharge, and because Dr. Steele has come forward with evidence that a supervisor directly involved in the decision making process made repeated discriminatory remarks, we reverse the district court’s grant of summary judgment and remand for further proceedings.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 10, 2018  ..  8th Cir.:  Ashe v. HHS  ...   From October 2007 until his termination in February 2017, Ashe was employed at HHS’s National Institutes of Health as an Industrial Engineer and Safety Engineering Activity Program Manager in the Division of Occupational Health and Safety, Office of Research Services. For most of that time, Ashe served as the Contracting Officer Representative on a biosafety laboratories contract.      Ashe alleges that, in April 2013, his supervisor, Dr. Deborah Wilson, instructed him to fabricate an engineer- ing report stating that a laboratory was suitable for use in research, when in fact the lab failed to meet a critical regulatory requirement. Ashe refused to remove from the report what he viewed as a lab deficiency, and, instead, reported the incident to Dr. Wilson’s supervisor.      He also alleges that, in early 2015, he discovered evidence of contract fraud, which he likewise reported to Dr. Wilson and another supervisor.  ...  COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 10, 2018  ..  Fed. Cir.:  Cristobal v. OPM  ...   Precioso A. Cristobal (“Cristobal”) appeals from the final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board (“the Board”) affirming the decision of the Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) denying his request for annuity benefits for his prior federal service under the Civil Ser- vice Retirement System (“CSRS”).      Cristobal worked as a Forklift Operator at Subic Bay, Philippines from October 20, 1975 until about March 24, 1982, when he was appointed to the position of Rigger, a position he held until his retirement on May 29, 1992. Throughout his continuous employment, Cristobal’s appointment forms (SF-50) indicated his retirement code as “4-None” or “5-Other” and his annuitant indicator as “9 Not Applicable.” Cristobal admitted that no deductions were ever withheld from his pay for the CSRS.  ..  COURT DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 9, 2018  ..  VAOIG:  MISUSE OF TIME & RESOURCES WITHIN THE VETERANS ENGINEERING RESOURCE CENTER, INDIANAPOLIS.    The VAOIG substantiated that a Supervisory Industrial Engineer misused VA time and resources to start a privately-owned business and solicited subordinate staff to join this business.   Summary   Report

☀       August 8, 2018  ...  FLRA:  AFGE v. VA (Houston)  ...   The grievant volunteered to cover another employee’s schedule until that employee returned to work. When the employee eventually returned to work, the grievant resumed her regular schedule.     The Union filed a grievance alleging that the Agency violated the law and the parties’ agreement because the Agency did not bargain with the Union before returning the grievant to her regular schedule.     On December 15, 2017, Arbitrator AlmaLee P. Guttshall issued an award denying the Union’s grievance.     The Union files exceptions alleging that the award is contrary to the Federal Service Labor‑Management Relations Statute (the Statute),[1] and the Federal Employees Flexible and Compressed Work Schedules Act (the Work Schedules Act).  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       August 7, 2018  ...  Fed. Cir.:  F.E.A (Graviss) v. Defense  ...   Ms. Graviss was removed by the agency from her position as a teacher working for the Department of Defense Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools. Ms. Graviss sought review by an arbitrator, as allowed by the applicable collective bargaining agree- ment. The arbitrator sustained the removal in a decision dated April 20, 2015.     This panel initially held that the agency had violated petitioner’s procedural due process rights in connection with her discharge from federal service.     The en banc court granted review and vacated the panel opinion.     This case returns to the panel after an order by the en banc court “to dissolve the en banc court . . . and refer[] [the case] to the original panel.”   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July, 2018  ...   MSPB EXPLAINS NEW RESTRICTIONS ON AGENCIES ACCESSING EMPLOYEE MEDICAL RECORDS:   Following is the portion of a recent posting on the MSPB site explaining a change in law enacted last year making it a prohibited personnel practice for agencies to access the medical records of their employees under certain circumstances, including as an act of retaliation. :     ( fedweek.com )

☀       July, 2018  ...   OPM SETS SCHEDULE TO CARRY OUT ORDERS ON DISCIPLINE, BARGAINING:   Following are three sets of guidance OPM issued on carrying out President Trump’s recently issued executive orders—one on disciplinary practices, one on bargaining in general and the third on bargaining on allowable official time for employees with union roles. :     ( fedweek.com )

☀       July 30, 2018  ...  FLRA:  SBA v. AFGE  ...   The Agency selected the grievant for a promotion, and then rescinded the offer, because it discovered that it had improperly granted the grievant a veterans’ preference that had been credited to his application. The Union filed a grievance alleging that the Agency violated the parties’ agreement and law by rescinding the grievant’s promotion. Arbitrator Dineo Coleman Gary found that the Agency did not violate any law or the parties’ agreement. However, the Arbitrator awarded the grievant backpay.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 30, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Prisons (Florence) v. AFGE  ...   This case reflects another attempt by the American Federation of Government Employees to force bargaining whenever it is dissatisfied with the way that the Bureau of Prisons assigns work under Article 18 of the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement (Article 18).[1] Here, Arbitrator Joe H. Henderson found that the Agency was contractually obligated to bargain before increasing assignments of non‑custody correctional officers to custody posts. We find that the Agency’s assignment of work, in compliance with Article 18, did not trigger a duty to bargain. Therefore, the Arbitrator’s contrary conclusion fails to draw its essence from the parties’ agreement, and we set aside his award.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 27, 2018  ...  FLRA:  AFGE v. Prisons (Hazleton)  ...   THE UNION FILED ULP ... THEN WITHDREW ULP ... THEN FILED THIS GRIEVANCE.  ...   The Union sought to bargain over the impact and implementation of the augmentation policy, but the Agency notified the Union that it had no duty to bargain because the matter was covered by the parties’ collective‑bargaining agreement.     On June 17, 2016, the Union filed a ULP charge against the Agency with the Federal Labor Relations Authority’s Washington Regional Director (RD). The charge alleged that the Agency violated the Statute and the parties’ agreement by refusing to bargain over implementation of the augmentation policy. Shortly thereafter, the Union requested to withdraw the ULP charge, and the RD granted the Union’s request.     Ten days after the Union withdrew the ULP charge, on August 15, 2016, the Agency implemented the augmentation policy. The Union then filed a grievance alleging that the Agency’s failure to bargain and its implementation of the augmentation policy violated the Statute and the parties’ agreement.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 26, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Army (Little Rock),  v. IBEW  ...   The grievants are prevailing-rate employees.[2] Under the SAA and Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) 5120.39, the Agency pays the grievants according to a pay schedule created by the Special Pay Branch of the Department of Defense Civilian Personnel Advisory Service, Wage and Salary Division (the Wage Fixing Authority). The Wage Fixing Authority’s current pay schedule, the Southwest Power Rate Schedule, does not pay the grievants a night differential.     On May 1, 2015, the Union filed a grievance alleging that the Agency improperly failed to pay the grievants a night differential as required by § 5343(f) of the Prevailing Rate Systems Act of 1972 (PRSA).[3] Under § 5343(f), “[a] prevailing[-]rate employee is entitled to pay at his scheduled rate plus a night differential.”[4] Unable to resolve the grievance, the parties submitted it to arbitration.         The central question of this case is whether bargaining-unit employees, working in a federally-operated, hydroelectric power plant, can be paid a night-differential wage under federal regulations when other comparable federal employees are not.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 23, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Army (Fort Eustis) v. NAIL  ...   Background:    An intern successfully completed an Agency intern program and was placed in a general schedule position.[1] The Union filed a grievance challenging the Agency’s noncompetitive placement of the intern. The parties were unable to resolve the grievance. On September 23, 2016, the Union invoked arbitration and delivered its invocation to the CPAC. The invocation did not reach the Brigade Commander until October 27, 2016.     Before the Arbitrator, the Agency argued that the grievance was not arbitrable because the Union failed to deliver its “request” to the Brigade Commander within ten working days, as required by Article 45 of the parties’ agreement.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 23, 2018  ...  FLRA:  SBA v. AFGE  ...   In January 2015, the Union filed a grievance on behalf of an employee (the grievant) who alleged that she had not received appropriate compensation for certain work. The grievance went to arbitration before Arbitrator John L. Woods. Before a hearing was held, the Agency filed, with the Arbitrator, a motion to dismiss the grievance, claiming that it involved an issue excluded from the negotiated grievance procedure – specifically, the classification of a position. On October 27, 2016, the Arbitrator issued an arbitrability award denying the Agency’s motion to dismiss.     The main issue before us is whether the arbitrability award is contrary to law because the grievance involves classification within the meaning of § 7121(c)(5) – and, thus, is not grievable or arbitrable.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 23, 2018  ...  FLRA:  NTEU v. Homeland (Customs) ...  This matter is before the Authority on a negotiability appeal filed under § 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Statute).0F[1] It concerns the negotiability of two Union proposals related to how the Agency calculates employees’ compensation for travel.     Proposal 1 proposes using road miles instead of an “as the crow flies” radius to define the area encompassing the official duty station.     Proposal 2: When employees travel outside of the official duty station, their entire travel, not just the segment outside of the official duty station, be considered hours of employment. ..  FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 20, 2018  ...  D.C.:  Savage v. Burwell (HHS)  ...   Plaintiff Wanda Savage brought this lawsuit claiming that, during her tenure at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Department took a host of discriminatory and retaliatory actions against her based on her race, sex, and disability status; that it retaliated against her for filing a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”); and that it failed to reasonably accommodate her disability.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 20, 2018  ...  3rd Cir.:  Leftwich v. Treasury  ...   Leftwich began employment with the Internal Revenue Service in November 2009. Leftwich, who is black, alleged that she began experiencing incidents of discrimination on the basis of race in April 2012. As regulations of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) required, Leftwich met with an EEO counselor in August 2012 to attempt informal resolution of her concerns. Leftwich then filed a formal complaint with the Treasury Department in October 2012. Leftwich filed four amendments to her formal complaint through October and November 2012 due to what she called continued escalating harassment and retaliation. The Department eventually issued a final agency decision on Leftwich’s formal complaint in January 2015 which denied all relief. Leftwich then brought suit against the Secretary of the Treasury in the District Court.  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 19, 2018  ...  5th Cir.:  United States v. Mrs. Hanchett ..   YOU MUST READ THIS DECISION ... RAP SHEET.  ...  Mrs. Hanchett is a college-educated mother of five children (ages 5 to 24), who has held and is capable of lawful, gainful employment,    but yet also has repeatedly engaged in blatantly reckless and unlawful conduct with obviously negative consequences for herself and her children.       Mrs. Hanchett earned a bachelor of science degree from Texas Southern University in “Administration of Justice” (of all things).       Far from using her education to further justice [...] by legal means, she completely abandoned lawful employment in 2008 for a life of crime.  ...  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 19, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Defense Education v. FEA  ...   Statement of the Case    These matters involve Agency attempts to recover overpayments of various benefits (for example, housing allowances) that it believed it had made to Agency employees stationed in Europe. There is no dispute that the Agency is entitled to collect overpayments that it made to its employees. Rather, the Union argued that the Agency did not follow the procedures set forth in the Debt Collection Act (DCA)[1] and Article 45 of the parties’ collective‑bargaining agreement (Article 45) in collecting the overpayments and that the Agency miscalculated alleged overpayments. The Arbitrators involved in these cases found that the Agency violated collection procedures and ordered audits to ensure that the Agency had collected the proper amounts from the grievants.     While the parties engaged in continuing compliance measures to calculate exact amounts owed to either the government or the grievants, the Union submitted applications for attorney fees. Because the Arbitrators awarded attorney fees in each case, the specific question before us is whether the Union is entitled to attorney fees under the Back Pay Act (BPA).   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 18, 2018  ...  5th Cir:  Stroy v. VA (Lafayette)  ...   John Stroy filed suit against his employer, the Department of Veterans Affairs, alleging racial discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 18, 2018  ...  6th Cir.:  Hostettler v. Wooster  ...   Heidi Hostettler was fired from the College of Wooster’s Human Resources Department when she was unable to return to work on a full-time basis as she was recovering from postpartum depression and separation anxiety. She sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),the Civil Rights Act; the Family and Medical Leave Act.     The district court granted summary judgment to Wooster on all claims. The lynchpin of the district court’s decision was its conclusion that Hostettler did not make out a prima facie case under the ADA because she could not meet an essential function of the position—full-time work—and so was not otherwise qualified for the job.     Because genuine disputes of material fact remain, we reverse the judgment of the district court and remand for trial.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 18, 2018  ...  10th Cir.:  Nicholson v. Mnuchin  ...   While employed at the IRS, Jason Nicholson sent anonymous letters to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. The letters falsely claimed that three IRS employees discussed assassinating the President of the United States. Mr. Nicholson admitted that he wrote the letters because his co-workers had caused him to receive a negative performance evaluation and to lose a scheduled salary grade increase.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 17, 2018  ...  FLRA:  EPA v. AFGE  ...   Since 2005, the Union has participated in an annual three-day legislative conference held by the American Federation of Government Employees. The primary purpose of the conference is to permit employees to engage in lobbying activities on behalf of the Union.     The Union requested official time for certain employees to attend, and travel back from, a conference. The Agency granted official time for attendance at the conference, but denied it for the return travel. Arbitrator Elliot H. Shaller issued an award finding that the Agency violated Article 6 of the parties’ master collective‑bargaining agreement (Article 6) by denying the travel portion of the Union’s official‑time request.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 17, 2018  ...  FLRA:  AFGE v. Defense (DISA)  ...   On November 7, 2017, Arbitrator Langdon D. Bell denied the Union’s grievance. He found that the Union had failed to meet its burden to demonstrate that the grievant either was working under an inaccurate position description or was performing substantive, recurring job duties omitted from his current position description.     The Union has filed exceptions to the award, arguing that the award fails to draw its essence from Article 12 of the parties’ master and local supplemental agreements, which obliges the Agency to maintain accurate position descriptions. .  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 17, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Justice (Prisons) v. AFGE  ...   In this case, we are called upon once again to determine whether certain activities which occur during a shift change – in this case, the exchange of information between officers going off shift and those coming on shift – constitute compensable principal activities.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       Agencies began enforcing executive orders that prevent federal union use of government offices and supplies as well as restricting representation time. (Leo Shane III/Staff) Starting July 9, federal agencies were required to begin restricting union activities and evict union representation from the federal office spaces they occupied under a series of executive orders signed by President Donald Trump just over a month earlier.     Federal Times

☀       July 13, 2018  ...  FSIP:  Comptroller of the Currency v. NTEU  ...   THIS NEGOTIABILITY CASE IS A MEATY ONE ... REALLY WORTH READING, SAVING.  ...   In or around April or May 2016, the Agency notified the Union that the 28 bargaining unit employees would be relocating from a PNC Bank located at Two PNC Plaza in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to another PNC Bank across the street located at One PNC Plaza in June 2017.     The Union requested impact and implementation bargaining over changes to bargaining unit employees' conditions of employment as a result of the office relocation.     The parties engaged in bilateral negotiation sessions; however, the parties were unable to reach a resolution during negotiations. They enlisted the services of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS). The parties could not resolve the dispute in mediation. Accordingly, FMCS released the parties. The Union filed a request for assistance with the Panel in Case No. 17 FSIP 016.   ...   FSIP DECISION:   (.pdf)

☀       July 13, 2018  ...  FLRA:  NTEU v. Homeland (Border)  ...   The Union filed this negotiability appeal (petition) under § 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute). The case concerns the negotiability of two proposals, which would limit the rating levels the Agency uses to evaluate employees’ performance. The Agency filed a statement of position, to which the Union filed a response. The Agency did not file a reply to the Union’s response.     The main question before us is whether the proposals impermissibly affect the Agency’s rights to direct employees and assign work under § 7106(a)(2)(A) and (B) of the Statute or whether the proposals fall within an exception to those rights.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 13, 2018  ...  FLRA:  AFGE v. VA  ...   .  ...   GOOD-FOR-NOTHING UNION REPS THINK THEY CAN TELL MANAGEMENT WHAT TO DO !  ...   Today we address the role of collective bargaining and union representatives in matters concerning, and issues arising out of, Inspector General investigations. This is a significant issue because Inspectors General operate independently, under statutory authority, and their responsibilities under that authority may not be compromised through collective bargaining.     During an audit of the Agency’s operations, the Agency’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) gave a survey to, and conducted follow-up interviews with, certain employees. Arbitrator Stuart Lipkind found that the Agency: (1) did not violate the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement by failing to notify the Union of, and bargain over, the OIG survey; and (2) did not violate the agreement or § 7114(a)(2)(A) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute)[1] by failing to notify the Union of, and allow it to be represented at, the follow-up interviews. There are two main questions before us.     The first question is whether the Arbitrator erred by finding no violation with respect to the OIG survey.     The second question is whether the Arbitrator’s finding with regard to the follow‑up interviews is contrary to § 7114(a)(2)(A) of the Statute.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       TECH:  MICROSOFT UNVEILS 10-INCH SURFACE GO TABLET   64GB = $399  MicroSD = yes ... (IPAD 64GB = $699) MicroSD = NO
☀       OPM:  Guidance for Implementation of •Executive Order 13837• – Ensuring Transparency, Accountability, and Efficiency in Taxpayer-Funded Union Time Use.
☀       OPM: Executive Order – Excepting Administrative Law Judges from the Competitive Service:    OPM

☀       July 12, 2018  ...  D.C. 2018:  Pellegrino v. TSA  ...   HORROR AT THE AIRPORT.  ...   Pellegrino and her husband, Harry Waldman, arrived at the Philadelphia International Airport, where they planned to catch a flight home to Florida.     After Pellegrino passed through a metal detector, a TSO directed her to step aside for further screening. A few minutes later, TSO Thomas Clemmons arrived and began to search Pellegrino’s bags, but because Pellegrino believed that Clemmons was treating neither her nor her bags respectfully, she asked for a private screening. According to Pellegrino, Clemmons then “walked off with a very arrogant, negative, hostile attitude,” and TSO Nuyriah Abdul-Malik came to perform the screening in Clemmons’s stead.     As Abdul-Malik prepared to search Pellegrino’s bags, Pellegrino “had the distinct feeling” that Abdul-Malik’s gloves were not clean and asked her to put on new ones. Abdul-Malik did as Pellegrino asked, but Pellegrino asserts that this request engendered hostility from Abdul-Malik. Abdul-Malik and Pellegrino then proceeded to a private screening room, where they were joined by TSA employees Laura Labbee, a supervisory TSO, and Denise Kissinger, another TSO.  ...   DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 12, 2018  ...  Ohio Court of Appeals:  Thevenin v. White Castle  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 12, 2018  ...  D.C. 2018:  Said v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 12, 2018  ...  (D.C. 2018):  COURT DECISION:   Middleton v. United States Department of Labor  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 11, 2018  ...  FSIP:  Agriculture v. AFGE  ...   AGRICULTURE'S REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE FROM THE FEDERAL SERVICES IMPASSES PANEL (PANEL).  ...   The Department of Agriculture, Customer Service Center (Agency or Management) filed a request for assistance with the Federal Services Impasses Panel (Panel) to consider a negotiation impasse over the remaining articles in a successor collective bargaining agreement (CBA) under the Federal Service LaborManagement Relations Statute (Statute), 5 U.S.C. §7119, between it and the American Federation of Government Employees, Local 3354 (Union).     Following an investigation of the Agency's request for assistance, the Panel determined that it would assert jurisdiction over the three articles identified in the Agency's request for assistance: official time, tours of duty, and telework. ...  FLRA DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 11, 2018  ...  FLRA:  NTEU v. FCC ..  In this case, we address proposals which would subject to negotiation the level of internal security an Agency is required to adopt when moving employees from one facility to another.     This matter is before the Authority on a negotiability appeal (petition) filed by the Union under § 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Statute). It concerns the negotiability of two proposals involving the Agency’s security procedures at two of its facilities.     The facilities are located in Powder Springs, Georgia and Livermore, California. The main question before us is whether the proposals impermissibly affect management’s right to determine internal security practices under § 7106(a)(1) of the Statute or whether they are negotiable appropriate arrangements under § 7106(b)(3) of the Statute.     Because the proposals excessively interfere with management’s right to determine internal security practices, they are not appropriate arrangements, and they are outside the duty to bargain.   DECISION:  (pdf)   (html)

☀       July 9, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Treasury (IRS) v. NTEU  ...   THE FACTS IN THIS TRAGIC STORY ARE LONG AND HAVE INVOLVED THREE ARBITRATION AWARDS.  ...   In this case, we are called upon to determine whether an employee, who pleaded guilty to manslaughter in the death of her granddaughter, should have received an outstanding performance rating after she was returned to duty by an arbitrator’s award that overturned the Agency’s removal for the grievant’s criminally negligent behavior.     The facts in this tragic story are long and have involved three arbitration awards. First, the grievant challenged her indefinite suspension and removal, and alleged a hostile work environment and reprisal under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) and the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 9, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Transportation (FAA) v. NATCA  ...   Arbitrator Kathy L. Eisenmenger issued an award finding that FAA violated Article 108, Section 4(C) of the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement (Article 108) by failing to provide a higher pay rate to a newly hired air traffic controller (the grievant). As a remedy, the Arbitrator directed FAA to pay the grievant backpay.     The main question before us is whether the Arbitrator’s interpretation of Article 108 is consistent with the plain meaning of that provision.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 6, 2018  ...  Fed. Cir.:  Boyd v. OPM (VA)  ...   AS A WOMAN AND NATRUAL-BORN "VICTIM," I CAN-NOT BE GUILTY OF SEXUAL HARASSING A MAN !!!  ...   Thasha A. Boyd (“Ms. Boyd”) was employed as a Veterans Service Representative at the Department of Veterans Affairs’ (“DVA”) VBA Atlanta Regional Office. Prior to her employment with the DVA, Ms. Boyd was employed at the Department of Labor (“DOL”) as an Immigration Program Analyst from May 3, 2010 to April 4, 2011. Subsequent to her departure from DOL and prior to her employment with the DVA, Ms. Boyd worked at the Internal Revenue Service.     On December 7, 2016, an employee of the Disabled American Veterans (“DAV”), Matthew Jahn (“Mr. Jahn”), filed a complaint alleging that Ms. Boyd had been making sexual advances towards him. Mr. Jahn’s complaint stated that he had informed Ms. Boyd that he was in a relationship, but that Ms. Boyd “continue[d] to harass [him],” and that “she has started to touch my leg, back, and tries to kiss my neck.” According to Mr. Jahn, Ms. Boyd also asked him whether “when [he] got home, if [he] was going to think about [having sex with] her.”   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 6, 2018  ...  DcDc:  Ekemezie v. CVS  ...   YES, I'M SUING CVS FOR DISCRIMINATORY FIRING AND MY GOOD-FOR-NOTHING UNION TOO !!!.  ...   Plaintiff Blessing Ekemezie worked as a pharmacist for CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (“CVS”) for twenty-five years, until she was fired on September 12, 2015. She claims that her firing violated federal and District of Columbia law for several reasons, including that it breached the collective bargaining agreement governing her employment and that it was the product of unlawful age- and race-based discrimination. CVS, for its part, asserts that the firing was justified by repeated instances of poor performance. Ekemezie also claims that her union, United Food & Commercial Workers Local 400 (“Local 400”), improperly declined to pursue a grievance on her behalf against CVS.  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 2, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Navy v. MM&S  ...   The grievants are civil-service mariners serving on the Mercy, a hospital-service support ship assigned to the Military Sealift Command of PACOM during specialized humanitarian missions throughout the South Pacific.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       July 2, 2018  ...  FLRA:  AFGE v. EPA  ...   In this case, we consider whether an arbitrator properly applied federal law in determining that the Agency did not discriminate against the grievant when it did not select her for a promotion.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 29, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Defense v. FEA  ...   FEA (Union) filed a ULP charge alleging that the Respondent (Agency) failed to comply with a 2003 arbitration award. Based on that charge, the Acting Regional Director (RD) of FLRA’s Washington Regional Office issued a complaint alleging that the Agency violated § 7116(a)(1) and (8) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute).     In the attached decision, an FLRA Administrative Law Judge (the Judge) determined, as relevant here, that the Union’s ULP charge was timely. The main question before us is whether the Judge erred in making that determination.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 29, 2018  ...  FLRA:  SBA v. AFGE  ...   ALL THIS INCOMPETENT ARBITRATOR KNOWS IS THAT SHE HATES MANAGEMENT.  ...   Arbitrator Sherry R. Wetsch issued an award finding that SBA violated several articles of the parties’ master collective-bargaining agreement (master agreement) and § 7116 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute).    Because the Arbitrator’s various conclusions are so unclear and unsupported that we cannot determine whether the award is deficient on the grounds raised by the Agency’s exceptions, we remand the award to the parties for resubmission to the Arbitrator for clarification of the award. ..  FLRA DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 27, 2018  ...  SUPREME COURT BARS MANDATORY UNION FEES FOR NON-MEMBERS  Janus v. AFSCME  ..  NPR Law Blog  ..  SCOTUS Blog

☀       June 27, 2018  ...  6th Cir.:  U.S. v. Johnson  ...   BLACK PROSTITUTE-THIEF, ROBS A BLACK FELON FOR $9,800 ... BLACK FELON ROBS HIS $9,800 BACK.   ...   In February 2016, a man robbed Nicola Gray at gunpoint. According to Gray, the robber followed her to her car as she was leaving a Memphis gas station, brandished his gun, demanded her money, and took her purse, which contained $9,800. When Gray chased after him, he shot at her and missed. She chased him in a car and memorized his license plate. Then she called the police.   ...   Kiunte Johnson pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition.   He appeals his sentence, arguing that the district court miscalculated his Sentencing Guidelines range by erroneously crediting an (allegedly) unreliable witness.     COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 26, 2018  ...  SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS TRUMP TRAVEL BAND (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen)  Trump v. Hawaii  ..  NPR Law Blog  ..  SCOTUS Blog

☀       June 26, 2018  ...  11th Cir.:  Wilcox v. Corrections Corporation of America  ...   Felecia Wilcox sued her employer, Corrections Corporation of America, for sexual harassment resulting in a hostile work environment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. She claimed that her co-worker slapped her behind.  ..  DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 26, 2018  ...  DcDc:  Hudson v. AFGE  ...   AFGE TREATS ITS BLACK EMPLOYEES WORST THAN MANAGEMENT ?  ...   Plaintiff Eugene Hudson, former National Secretary-Treasurer for Defendant American Federation of Government Employees, challenges his removal from that office under two federal statutes and D.C. contract law.     This case has now wound its way through three preliminary- injunction motions, a motion to dismiss, and an amended complaint. In this iteration of the litigation, AFGE again moves to dismiss.     Finding that Plaintiff has stated a facially plausible claim on all but one count, the Court will largely deny the Motion. ..  COURT DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 26, 2018  ...  FLRA:  AFGE v. Air Force  ...   CASE ABOUT AN AGENCY-FILED GRIEVANCE.  ...   The Agency filed a grievance alleging that the president abused official time[1] and violated the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement because he worked outside of his approved tour of duty without authorization. ..  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 25, 2018  ...  FLRA:  AFGE v. JUSTICE (Prisons)  ...   The Agency employs custody employees and non-custody employees. When custody employees are given special assignments outside of their regular work duties, the Agency often backfills by using other custody employees on overtime. Under certain circumstances, however, the Agency “augment[s]” – reassigns non-custody employees to temporarily perform the custody employees’ duties – in order to avoid using overtime. The parties have a MOU that addresses the circumstances under which augmentation can be used instead of assigning overtime.     The Union filed a grievance, claiming that the Agency changed the established overtime procedures by using non-custody employees to work shifts that previously would have been available to custody employees on overtime.  ...  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 25, 2018  ...  FLRA:  VA (San Diego) v. NAGE  ...   In this case, the Authority vacates an award wherein Arbitrator Gerald Burke orders, for a sympathetic grievant, what amounts to ten-years-worth of monetary awards without ever finding that the Agency violated any law or the parties’ agreement.     Specifically, the Arbitrator found that, over the course of ten years, the grievant, a program support analyst, performed duties outside of her position description. Although the Arbitrator recognized that he did not have any authority to award the grievant a quality step increase, time-off award, or backpay, he nonetheless awarded the grievant $5000 as a “special contribution” or “spot” award. ...  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 21, 2018  ...  Supreme Court:  THE SUPREME COURT RULES STATES MAY TAX ONLINE RETAILERS:   South Dakota v, Wayfair   ...   NPR Law Blog

☀       June 20, 2018  ...  7th Cir.:  Delgado v. MSPB  ...   SEVENTH CIRCUIT SMACKS DOWN OSC AND MSPB.  ...   Adam Delgado is a special agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. He alleges that his supervisors retaliated against him after he reported his suspicions that another agent had improperly shot at a fleeing suspect, provided an inaccurate report of the incident, and testified falsely about it in a federal criminal trial.     Delgado filed a whistleblower complaint with the Office of Special Counsel (OSC). The OSC declined to investigate.     Delgado then appealed to the Merit Systems Protection Board, but the Board dismissed his appeal for lack of jurisdiction.     SEVENTH CIRCUIT:  We find that the OSC and the Board applied unduly stringent and, we believe, arbitrary requirements on Delgado.  ...  DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 19, 2018  ...  VAOIG:  ALLEGED MISMANAGEMENT OF INPATIENT CARE [...] VA MEDICAL CENTER [...] TOPEKA, KANSAS.       The Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted a healthcare inspection at the Colmery-O’Neil VA Medical Center (Facility) in Topeka, Kansas, regarding an anonymous complainant’s allegations that physicians were practicing beyond their clinical privileges and expertise; physicians failed to seek assistance from specialists, thus placing patients at risk; and a nurse practitioner did not have physicians’ help or supervision for the inpatient medical service.      Summary   Report

☀       June 19, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Homeland (Imig & Cust) v. AFGE  ...   STATEMENT OF THE CASE:   In this case, the Agency sought to correct an unlawful practice under which nearly all law enforcement officers that it employed – approximately 5000 employees − were being paid excessive amounts of administratively uncontrollable overtime (AUO) on an ongoing basis to which they were not entitled. The Union grieved when the Agency did not bargain with the Union before it stopped the unlawful practice.     The Agency changed how it computed AUO after it was directed to bring its computation method into compliance with applicable government-wide regulations. Arbitrator Jeffrey J. Goodfriend found that the Agency violated the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement and committed an unfair labor practice (ULP) under § 7116 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute)[1] by not bargaining with the Union before making the change.     The question before us is whether the Arbitrator’s award is contrary to law. We find that the Agency’s former method of computing AUO entitlements was contrary to government-wide regulations. Because the Agency was not required to bargain before changing that unlawful practice, the Agency did not commit a ULP. Therefore, the award is contrary to law.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 15, 2018  ...  JUSTICE OIG:  REPORT ON VARIOUS ACTIONS BY FBI AND JUSTICE IN ADVANCE OF THE 2016 ELECTION.    Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz announced today the release of a report examining various actions by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the DOJ in advance of the 2016 election in connection with the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server (referred to by the FBI and DOJ as the “Midyear” investigation).    The DOJ Office of the Inspector General’s (OIG) findings are summarized in detail in the report’s Executive Summary, included below.   Summary   Report

☀       June 14, 2018  ...  VAOIG:  ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION: ALLEGED MISUSE OF VA POSITION AND RESOURCES.       The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) received allegations that a senior manager at a VA medical facility abused their position and VA resources. The senior manager allegedly instructed a subordinate to provide the senior manager’s family member with additional daily Home-Based Primary Care (HBPC) home nursing visits as well as additional fee-basis homemaker services. More specifically, the complainant alleged that the senior manager requested these services be provided to his/her family member while the senior manager was on vacation.      Summary   Report

☀       June 14, 2018  ...  FLRA:  AFGE v. SSA  ...   As a preliminary matter, §§ 2425.4(c) and 2429.5 of the Authority’s Regulations bar consideration of the grievant’s exceptions that the award is contrary to 5 U.S.C. § 4301 and 43 C.F.R. § 430.207.[5] Neither the record nor the award indicates that the Union made any allegation that the Agency’s actions were contrary to law. The Union should have known to raise these arguments before the Arbitrator, but the record does not reflect that the Union did so. ..  FLRA DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 13, 2018  ...  9th Cir.:  Campbell v. Edu-Hi  ...   HIGH SCHOOL HELL !  ...   We must decide whether a high school teacher who was verbally harassed by her students has identified sufficient evidence to support claims for violations of her federal civil rights against the public school system that employed her.     Patricia Campbell was employed by the Hawaii Department of Education (DOE) from 2000 until she resigned in July 2009. From 2004 through 2007, Campbell taught music and band at King Kekaulike High School (KKHS) on the island of Maui.     Campbell alleges that, throughout her time at KKHS, she was frequently harassed and degraded by students on the basis of her race (white) and her sex (female). She alleges that students called her a slew of offensive names, including “fucking weirdo,” “cunt,” “bitch,” and “fucking haole.” 1 According to Campbell, she was even physically threatened by one student who claimed to have a gun.     Campbell routinely reported the students’ misconduct to DOE administration.  ...  DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 11, 2018    ...   UPCOMING FLRA TRAINING (Dallas, Atlanta, Durham).  ...   Status : OPEN

☀       June 11, 2018  ...  Cal. Ct. App.:  Camacho v. Target  ...   Plaintiff Adrian Camacho appeals on his causes of action for discrimination based on sexual orientation, harassment causing a hostile work environment, failure to prevent harassment and discrimination, retaliation, constructive termination in violation of public policy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, negligent hiring, supervision, and retention, etc.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 11, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Homeland (Prisons) v. AFGE  ...   ANOTHER CROOKED UNION-LOVIN ARBITRATOR HAS TO BE SMACKED BACK TO REALITY.  ...   This case returns to the Authority for a second time to resolve whether the Agency had an obligation to notify and bargain with the Union before it modified the application of its shift-trade procedure.     In the first decision, the Authority determined that the matter was covered by Article 28 and the Agency had no statutory obligation to bargain under those circumstances.     However, the majority decided to remand the matter to the Arbitrator for him to address a “critical ambiguity” concerning whether the Arbitrator intended to find that Article 3 of the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement created a separate bargaining obligation.     In his remand award, Arbitrator T. Zane Reeves again concluded that the Agency violated Article 3 of the parties’ agreement when it neither informed nor negotiated with the Union prior to implementing the modified shift-trade procedure.    FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 7, 2018  ...  FSIP:  Defense Logistics Agency  v. AFGE  ...   The Agency filed a request for assistance, under the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (Statute), 5 U.S.C. §7119, with the Federal Services Impasses Panel (Panel) to consider a negotiations impasse over a provision that had been disallowed on Agency Head Review (Article 20 C.2.a). The Union was also seeking assistance with additional provisions in the parties' Article 20 that was not in agreement between the parties.     Following an investigation of the Agency's request for assistance, the Panel determined that it would assert jurisdiction over the dispute concerning Article 20 C.2.a. Under 5 C.F.R. §2471.6 (a)(2) of its regulations, the Panel determined that it would resolve the impasse through a Written Submission procedure, with opportunity for rebuttal statements The parties were informed that, after considering the entire record, the Panel would take whatever action it deemed appropriate to resolve the dispute, which may include issuance of a binding decision. The parties were also advised that the Panel declined jurisdiction over the remaining provisions in Article 20 presented by the Union. The Panel has now considered the entire record, including the parties' final offers, written submissions, and the rebuttal statements.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 7, 2018  ...  5th Cir.:  Kinard v. Dish Network  ...   The Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board sued DISH Network Corp., seeking an injunction against unilateral changes to employee wages during collective bargaining. The district court granted the injunction in part.     Both DISH and the Board appealed.   ...   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 6, 2018  ...  D.C.:  Brookens v. AFGE  ...   Defendant American Federation of Government Employees (“AFGE”) placed one of its local chapters, Local 12, under trusteeship and cancelled the Local 12 elections of officers that were scheduled to take place two weeks later.     Plaintiff Benoit Brookens, proceeding pro se, had planned to run for several positions and, after the elections were cancelled, he filed this action in D.C. Superior Court challenging the imposition of trusteeship.     AFGE removed the case to this Court, and has now moved to dismiss for lack of standing and for failure to state a claim..  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 5, 2018  ...  Supreme Court:  THE SUPREMES ISSUE FIVE OPINIONS:   Decisions   ...   SCOTUS Blog Analysis

☀       June 5, 2018  ...  11th Cir.:  U.S. (SSA) v. Whitaker  ...   SHE FEELS LIKE A VICTIM OF THE SYSTEM THAT CONVICTED HER FOR SOCIAL SECURITY FRAUD.  ...   Tracy Whitaker appeals her convictions for theft of government funds, 18 U.S.C. § 641, and for making false statements, 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a). Briefly stated, Whitaker’s convictions stem from her misuse of Social Security disability benefits she received on behalf of her minor daughter (as her daughter’s representative payee)     [ She received monthly SSA disability payments based on her fraudulent representation that she was the custodial parent of her disabled daughter. ]   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       June 4, 2018  ...  SCOTUS:  SUPREME COURT SIDES WITH "CHRISTIAN" BAKER WHO REFUSED TO BAKE A "GAY" CAKE. Gays who like to eat yummy delicious cake, Rejoice at not having to wonder whats in the cake.

☀       June 1, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Defense (MDA) v. AFGE  ...   The Agency denied the Union’s request to host events, specifically “lunch and learns,”[1] in a ground floor hallway of an Agency-controlled building.     The Federal Labor Relations Authority’s (FLRA’s) General Counsel (GC) issued a complaint alleging that the Agency committed an unfair labor practice (ULP) under § 7116(a)(1) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute)[2] by denying the Union’s request to access its building.     The parties each filed summary-judgment motions before FLRA Chief Administrative Law Judge Charles R. Center (Judge).   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 30, 2018  ...  FLRA:  AFGE v. Agriculture (Food Safety)  ...   UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE ?  ...   This is an unfair labor practice proceeding under the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, 5 U.S.C. §§ 7101-7135 (Statute), and the Rules and Regulations of the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA/Authority), part 2423.     On June 29, 2017, the Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service (Agency) filed an unfair labor practice (ULP) charge against the American Federation of Government Employees, National Joint Council of Food Inspection Locals, AFL-CIO (Respondent/Union). After conducting an investigation, the Regional Director of the Washington Region of the FLRA issued a Complaint and Notice of Hearing on November 15, 2017, alleging that the Respondent violated § 7116(b)(1) and (5) of the Statute by refusing to negotiate over a new successor master agreement. In its Answer to the Complaint, dated November 29, 2017, the Respondent admitted some of the factual allegations, but denied that it violated the Statute.     A hearing was conducted on February 22, 2018, in Washington D.C. All parties were represented and afforded an opportunity to be heard, to introduce evidence, and to examine witnesses. The GC and Respondent filed post-hearing briefs, which I have fully considered.     Based on the entire record, including my observation of the witnesses and their demeanor, I find that the Union violated § 7116(b)(1) and (5) of the Statute by refusing to participate in the negotiation of a new master agreement. In support of this determination, I make the following findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations.   ...   FLRA DECISION:  (pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 29, 2018  ...  FLRA:  HUD v. AFGE  ...   AFGE filed a grievance alleging that the HUD had improperly advertised and filled positions with a promotion potential to General Schedule (GS)-13 in a manner that deprived GS-12 bargaining-unit employees of the opportunity to be non-competitively promoted to the GS-13 level. As a remedy, AFGE requested promotion potential to the GS-13 level “for all similarly situated employees” at the GS-12 level.     The Agency argued that the grievance concerned classification and was therefore not arbitrable under § 7121(c)(5) and a provision in the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement. The parties submitted one issue to the Arbitrator: whether the grievance was arbitrable.     THE BIASED UNION-LOVING ARBITRATOR: The Arbitrator determined that the grievance did not concern classification but rather “the fairness of advertisements and vacancy announcements,”[5] even though the remedy requested by AFGE was the “reassignment of employees to reclassified positions.”     HUD filed exceptions.  ...  DECISION:  (pdf)   (html)

☀       May 25, 2018  ...  FLRA:  IAFF v. ARMY  ..  The Agency issued an employee (the grievant) a letter of reprimand, and the Union filed a grievance. Subsequently, the grievant was separated from federal service. Because the grievant was no longer a federal employee, Arbitrator James R. Bailey issued an award closing the grievance. There are two questions before us.     The first question is whether the award fails to draw its essence from the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement.     The second question is whether the Arbitrator’s interpretation of the agreement is contrary to the Union’s right to pursue grievances under § 7121(b)(1)(C)(i) of the FLRA Statute.  ..  FLRA DECISION:  (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 24, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Justice (Prisons) v. AFGE  ...  On July 15, 2017, Arbitrator George E. Larney issued an award finding that the Agency violated the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement by leaving cook-supervisor shifts vacant or assigning those shifts to non-bargaining-unit employees, rather than assigning the shifts to bargaining-unit employees (the grievants) on an overtime basis.     As remedies, the Arbitrator ordered the Agency to: stop vacating shifts for the purpose of avoiding paying the grievants overtime; reinstate the established procedure used to fill vacated shifts; and pay the grievants for lost overtime opportunities.     The main question before us is whether the Arbitrator’s determination that the Agency could not assign cook-supervisor shifts to non-unit employees or leave the shifts vacant based on “economic reasons” is contrary to management’s right to assign work under § 7106(a)(2)(B) of the FLRA Statute.  ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 23, 2018  ...  D.C.:  Daniels v. Wilkie (VA Danville, Ill)  ...   Plaintiff Reginald Daniels brings this action against Robert Wilkie, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”), alleging violations of the Civil Rights Act, the Reh Act, VEVRAA, WPA, HIPAA, and the 1st, 5th, and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution.     FACTUAL BACKGROUND     Plaintiff Reginald Daniels is an African-American veteran with multiple psychological diagnoses. See Compl. After serving as a U.S. Navy chaplain for approximately eighteen years, Mr. Daniels was hired as a chaplain by Veterans Affairs Illiana Health Care System (“VA-IHCS”) in Danville, Illinois.     Mr. Daniels suffers from Borderline Asperger Syndrome, a developmental disorder that limits his ability to effectively socialize and communicate. Due to this disorder, during his time as a chaplain, Mr. Daniels often offended people by involuntarily using unfiltered words and phrases, such as “seductive,” “extra-marital affairs,” “sensual,” “whorehouse,” “brothel,” and “wet T-shirt.”     Mr. Daniels’s supervisor advised him not to use profanity when talking with other staff members, and especially with female staff members.     Mr. Daniels alleges that during his employment Defendant failed to provide him with reasonable accommodations for his “abnormal” mode of communication.  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 23, 2018  ...  5th Cir.:  Davenport v. Jones & Co  ...   Tyanne Davenport (“Davenport”) appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Davenport’s former employer on her to claims of quid pro quo sexual harassment [...]     The district court dismissed Davenport’s constructive discharge quid pro quo claim because it was unexhausted and dismissed Davenport’s bonus-based quid pro quo claim because, it concluded, this circuit does not recognize quid pro quo sexual harassment claims based on a supervisor’s request that a subordinate date a third-party in exchange for monetary bonuses.     The district court found that, in any event, Davenport had not offered sufficient evidence to create a genuine dispute as to whether she was denied a bonus, i.e., whether she suffered the tangible employment action required to make a quid pro quo Title VII claim actionable.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 23, 2018  ...  1st Cir.:  Irobe v. AgricultureE  ...   IN VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SNAP (Food Stamp) PROGRAM ?  ...   This appeal challenges a finding by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), echoed on de novo review by the district court, that a grocery store unlawfully trafficked in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits.     The plaintiffs are Mahdi Irobe and Suuqa Bakaro Grocery (a grocery store in Lewiston, Maine, catering principally to that community's sizeable Somali immigrant population).     The Store is diminutive: it is only about 800 square feet in size, lacks shopping baskets or carts, and contains a single 2.5-by-1.5-foot-long checkout counter.     It carries minimal amounts of fresh produce and frozen foods and does not offer many of the staples commonly found in markets (such as baby food, eggs, and fresh bread).     In lieu of such staples, the Store offers Somali delicacies like goat and camel meat, along with certain nonperishables like sugar, flour, rice, pasta, and cooking oil.     Our task requires us to decide, among other things, if the burden of proof was properly placed on the grocer.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 21, 2018   Supreme Court Opinion:   Epic Systems Corp. V. Lewis  ...   EMPLOYERS PREVAIL IN ARBITRATION CASE ... CONSERVATIVE JUSTICES UPHOLD MANDATORY EMPLOYMENT ARBITRATION CLAUSES.  ...   the Supreme Court ruled, by a vote of 5-4, that employers can include a clause in their employment contracts that requires employees to arbitrate their disputes individually, and to waive the right to resolve those disputes through joint legal proceedings instead. Although it likely won’t garner the attention that some of this term’s other cases will receive, the decision was a huge victory for employers, because it could significantly reduce the number of claims against them.     Scotus Blog   ...   SUPREME COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 18, 2018  ...  D.C.:  Nunnally v. DC Police  ...   Ronda Nunnally is a former lieutenant in the Washington DC Metropolitan Police Department (MPD).    In 2004, Ronda Nunnally filed an internal MPD complaint alleging that she was being sexually harassed by her supervisor. Nunnally subsequently reported that she had undergone several years of workplace stress and abuse related to the sexual harassment and to retaliation for reporting it.     Nunnally was retired on disability by the District of Columbia Police and Firefighters' Retirement and Relief Board.     She seeks review of the Board‘s decision that her injury was not incurred in the performance of duty and that she is therefore not entitled to more generous retirement benefits.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 17, 2018  ...  5th Cir.:  Gonzales v. Wells Fargo  ...   Beatrice Gonzales appeals the district court’s dismissal of her claims against her onetime employer, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, for discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”).  ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 17, 2018  ...  FLRA:  VA (St. Petersburg) v. AFGE  ...   Arbitrator Richard John Miller issued an award (first award) in Department of VA, St. Petersburg Regional Benefit Office ( VA I ) finding that the Agency did not provide the Union with adequate office space and access to that office and, thereby, violated the parties’ collective-bargaining agreement and a memorandum of understanding (MOU).     As relevant here, the Arbitrator ordered the Agency, as part of the remedy, to grant a Union vice president a personal-identity-verification (PIV) card.     The Agency filed exceptions to the first award.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 17, 2018  ...  FLRA:  Kearns v. FAA  ...   Since 2012, Plaintiff Kevin Kearns has been the subject of a number of complaints regarding his conduct at the Federal Aviation Administration. Concerned that such allegations would stymie his future career prospects, Kearns sought documents under the Freedom of Information Act relating to his tenure at the FAA. Filing his first FOIA request in July 2015, followed by a FOIA and Privacy Act request in November 2015, and a third under both statutes in 2016, Kearns sought various agency files and reports he asserts may contain false information.     In response, the agency provided Plaintiff with an Accountability Board case report and with two Reports of Investigation and related attachments. These documents detail a series of inquiries into Kearns’s conduct at the FAA, including allegations that he had discriminated on the basis of gender and sexual orientation.     The case reports and investigation files were not, however, provided in full. Instead, the agency redacted certain portions of the reports and withheld pages from the files.   ...   FLRA DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 16, 2018  ...  D.C. Cir.:  Drielak v. Scott Pruitt  ...   Drielak brought this action claiming that his supervisors at the Environmental Protection Agency discriminated against him because of his age, in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.     EPA hired Drielak in 2003 as a law-enforcement specialist within the agency’s Office of Criminal Enforcement, Forensics, and Training. He was then 50 years old. For the next seven years, Drielak rose through the ranks, eventually becoming Director of the Homeland Security Division in the Criminal Enforcement Office. In 2010, as part of an agency-wide restructuring, EPA eliminated the Homeland Security Division. The director of the Criminal Enforcement Office reassigned Drielak to the Office’s Field Operations Program.     From 2010 through 2012, Drielak unsuccessfully applied for open positions in the Criminal Enforcement Office. Each time, the agency selected someone younger than Drielak.   ...   COURT DECISION:   (.pdf)   (.html)

☀       May 15, 2018  ...  Supreme Court Opinions:  ...   Murphy V. National Collegiate Athletic Association , in which the Supreme Court struck down a federal law that prohibited the states from legalizing sports gambling.     Mccoy V. Louisiana , in which the Supreme Court threw out the conviction and death sentence of a Louisiana inmate whose attorney had conceded the inmate’s guilt to the jury over the inmate’s explicit objection.     Byrd V. United States , in which the Supreme Court ruled that a driver who has permission to use a rental car is generally entitled to the same protections under the Fourth Amendment as the driver who rented the car.
See Scotusblog Discussion   ...   See Supreme Court Decisions

☀       OPM:  IMPLEMENTING USC 3322 POLICY GUIDANCE: ... requires an agency to make a permanent notation in the personnel record file of an employee who ... resigns prior to the resolution of  (1)  An investigation by an Inspector General;  (2)  An adverse personnel action under chapter 43 (performance) or chapter 75 (misconduct).   OPM


..... >