State Department reaches settlement over personnel violation
Officials broke a law that prohibits agencies from granting unauthorized preferences or advantages to job applicants.
Officials at the State Department improperly reissued a recruitment announcement after their preferred candidate failed to qualify the first time, an independent investigative agency announced last week.
In a confidential report, the Office of Special Counsel described an informal settlement with State in response to a January report on a violation of the law that prohibits agencies from granting unauthorized preferences or advantages to any employee or applicant.
State Department officials said the violations were unintentional and vowed to reopen the position and contact previous applicants to assess their interest. They also agreed to establish a new evaluation team.
The department agreed to require training in prohibited personnel practices for all subject officials and certain human resources staff, OSC said.
"The Prohibited Personnel Practice law is designed to protect the merit system against just this sort of improper shenanigans," said Scott Bloch, the head of OSC, in a statement.
As part of the settlement, OSC refused to release the names of the employee or agency officials involved in the case, largely because State demonstrated good faith by agreeing to the corrective actions in the settlement.
According to a human resources official at State, who requested anonymity, the department will begin the personnel training this summer. But the official noted that training on personnel practices is ongoing for all human resources employees at the department. "We are committed to a fair and transparent personnel system," the official said.
OSC spokesman Loren Smith said it is important for federal managers to be aware of the rules surrounding personnel changes, including promotions, job vacancy announcements and hiring procedures. "This can happen to any agency," he said. "There is no agency that's perfect in this regard."
NEXT STORY: Deferred vs. Postponed