ksaldarini@govexec.com
Every Friday on GovExec.com, Legal Briefs reviews several cases that involve, or provide valuable lessons to, federal managers. We report on the decisions of a wide range of review panels, including the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Federal Labor Relations Authority and federal courts.
It will take an act of Congress to undue the relocation mess the Customs Service put one of its employees in.
After the Customs Service informed employee Terry Neeley that he was being transferred from Washington, D.C. to San Francisco, Neeley went out to California and put a $2,200 non-refundable deposit down for a residential lease.
Soon after, the agency canceled Neeley's transfer and reassigned him to Baltimore. Neeley then submitted a claim to Customs for his forfeited deposit.
Customs could only reimburse him for $1,399.20 under a reimbursement cap in the Federal Travel Regulations, so Neeley took his claim for the remaining $800.80 to the General Services Board of Contract Appeals. The board ruled that Customs was just following the rules, so the only way Neeley can get the rest of his money is for Congress to approve a reimbursement under the Meritorious Claims Act.
Lesson: It ain't easy to get Uncle Sam to pay for his mistakes.
In the Matter of Terry M. Neeley, 14930-RELO, General Services Board of Contract Appeals, July 1, 1999.
Family Matters
Can a wife serve as an objective witness when testifying in defense of her husband? Yes, according to the Merit Systems Protection Board.
Laura Vasquez, Douglas Wright's supervisor at the Postal Service, charged that Wright pushed her against a wall during an exchange of words. Anita Wright, Douglas' wife, told a different version of the scene she witnessed. At a hearing before an administrative judge, Anita Wright testified that Vasquez brushed up against her husband when she tried to pass him in the hallway, but that Vasquez never hit a wall.
The administrative judge in the case refused to consider Anita Wright's testimony, discounting her claims as biased because she was the defendant's wife. The judge then fully credited Vasquez's testimony, even though she had a criminal record and had falsified a worker's compensation claim in the past.
But on appeal, the court held that the decision to disregard witness testimony must be made on the judge's ability to observe the demeanor of the witness. In this case, the judge based the decision on Wright's status as a wife, not on her conduct during the trial. The administrative judge's decision was reversed and the case was sent back to the courts.
Lesson: Familial loyalty should never be assumed.
Douglas M. Wright v. USPS (98-3260), Merit Systems Protection Board, June 15, 1999.
Sink or Swim
Think twice before you hop on a boat tour of Crater Lake in Oregon.
In 1996, Stephen Robinson told his Senator and park officials that tour leaders weren't exactly good skippers, often taking the tours out in bad weather. Many also lacked certification in boat operation. In addition, the boat engines conked out frequently, and the boats didn't carry enough safety equipment. But instead of praising Robinson for his heartfelt concern for parkgoers, park officials took the wind out of his sails.
Robinson and his wife, Amelia Bruno, were not offered jobs at the lake the next summer, and were again denied positions again the summer after that. The Office of Special Counsel took up their case, eventually ruling that Robinson and Bruno were denied employment in retaliation for whistleblowing. The supervisor was suspended for thirty days and the couple received full compensation and back pay.
Lesson: On boats, safety first or you might sink.
Robinson v. National Park Service, Office of Special Counsel, May 12, 1999.