Douglas Factor Mitigation for Federal Employees

By John V. Berry, Esq., www.berrylegal.com

There are two parts to a federal employee’s disciplinary case: (1) whether the federal employee committed the offense charged; and (2) if they committed the offense, what should the penalty be? One of the most significant issues in defending a federal employee in disciplinary cases involves arguing for mitigation of the penalty in a disciplinary case.  Arguing for mitigation generally means that we argue for the application of the Douglas Factors in attempting to mitigate (or reduce) disciplinary penalties issued in a case. For security clearance holders, Douglas Factors materials can help in related security clearance cases based on the proposed discipline.

Continue reading

Defending Federal Employees in PIP cases

By John V. Berry, Esq., www.berrylegal.com

It is important that federal employees faced with a performance improvement plan (PIP) consult an attorney as soon as possible. The longer that a federal employee goes forward in the performance improvement process, without legal representation, the more difficult it may be for an attorney to assist that individual later in the process. When federal employees fall below expected standards, they may be placed on a PIP. A PIP usually begins following a poor performance rating.

Performance Improvement Plans

The use of a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) is typically the beginning of the removal or demotion process for a federal employee. It is common practice for federal employees to be initially told that placement on a PIP is designed as a positive benefit to them and necessary to make them better performers. Managers sometimes even promise employees that they will be given special assistance to ensure that they are successful during their PIP periods, only to later find themselves facing a potential removal a few months later.

This article discusses federal employee concerns when PIPs become an issue. Please continue reading on the next page.

Federal Employee Computer and Internet Misuse

By John V. Berry, Esq., www.berrylegal.com

Federal employee use of government computers and workplace internet is fairly common at federal agencies. As a result, there are many times when federal employees get into disciplinary trouble involving their use of workplace computers or the internet. It is generally advised that federal employees avoid using federal agency computers and/or workplace internet, even where permitted, wherever possible. Many future problems can be avoided by taking this approach.

The most frequent problems that arise for federal employees in this area involve: (1) watching extended entertainment programs (Neltfix, Hulu, etc.); (2) excessive social media usage (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram); (3) gaming at work; and (4) watching, sending or receiving sexually explicit materials. There are any other number of examples which could run afoul of individual federal agency policies. While a number of federal agencies have adopted personal usage policies, many federal employees have not been given full training in this area and may run into potential disciplinary problems.  

This article discusses some of the more common issues. Please continue below to read the article.

OPM Proposes Changes to Allow Clear Record Agreements and Other Civil Service Issues

By John V. Berry, Esq., www.berrylegal.com

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has just issued new proposed regulations to rescind many of the prior Administration’s federal employee rule changes. The changes by OPM were those put into motion earlier this year when the President revoked Executive Order 13839 by signing Executive Order 14003. The President, in Executive Order 14003, directed OPM to suspend, revise, or rescind actions implementing Executive Order 13839.

OPM’s new rules will likely be fully implemented as soon as the short comment period is over.  The changes will eliminate the clean record settlement ban, alter performance-based actions, revise probationary period notices, and change a few other personnel issues for federal employees. By far, the most crucial change is the ability for federal agencies to enter into clear record settlements with federal employees in cases.

The MSPB Appeals Process for Federal Employees

By John V. Berry, Esq., www.berrylegal.com

We represent federal employees in Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) appeals. In other articles we go into more depth about various individual aspects of the MSPB appeals process, but this article focuses on a general summary of what to expect during the MSPB appeals process. There are sometimes some differences between appeals, but for the most part the major parts of the appeals process follow below.MSPB Appeal Logo Continue reading

Federal Employee Investigations

By John V. Berry, Esq. www.berrylegal.com

We often represent federal employees in federal agency initiated administrative kalkinesinvestigations. When a federal employee is under investigation or suspects that they may be investigated in regards to misconduct, on or off duty, it is important to have a federal employment attorney represent and/or advise them through the process. Continue reading

Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs) for Federal Employees

Image

By John V. Berry, Esq., www.berrylegal.com

Our law firm represents federal employees who have been placed on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) relating to alleged poor performance. Federal employees should always be wary if they learn that a PIP is being recommended or considered as a means of correcting a federal employee’s work performance. In our experience, the issuance of a PIP almost always indicates the beginning of the removal or reassignment process for a federal employee. Federal employees, however, are usually told that a PIP is only designed to benefit them and make them better performers. This, unfortunately, is not the usual case.

pip-plan

Continue reading

Resignation Before Termination – Federal Employee Concerns

By John V. Berry, Esq., www.berrylegal.com

We often receive questions from new clients about whether or not it makes sense to resignPERSONNEL ACTION instead of being removed / terminated by a federal agency. Generally, the answer to that question is no. There is usually no advantage to resigning prior to termination from a federal employment position once a proposed action has been issued with a settlement agreement being

BACKGROUND

The most typical situation where this issue arises occurs when a pending federal agency investigation has resulted in a proposed removal action. The federal employee is then given the notice of the proposed removal and the opportunity to respond. Thereafter, the employee is approached, usually by Human Resources, and informed of the option to resign before termination. The offer can sound tempting and the employee may think that by doing so that it leaves their employment record clear. That is not generally the case, however. A different situation may arise if the employee has been investigated but has not yet been served with a proposed removal action.

ISSUES WITH RESIGNING PRIOR TO REMOVAL

If a federal employee resigns after a proposed removal is issued, a number of issues can arise. For instance, the first issue is that the employee may receive their final personnel form, SF-50 and see that the federal agency has listed “removal in lieu of termination” or words to that effect as the basis of the action. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has an entire manual documenting the specific codes and descriptions to place on different types of resignations for federal employees. Such a notation essentially flags a federal employee as having left the federal service while a removal action was pending. Essentially, another future federal agency would see this as little different than if the SF-50 was coded to show that the employee was removed / terminated from the federal service.

Furthermore, the question of whether a federal employee resigned in lieu of removal / termination will be asked if the individual later applies for federal employment (OF-306) (Question 12) or a security clearance (SF-86 / e-QIP) (Section 13A.5). These forms require honest (and sworn) answers to the questions at issue.

The key to leaving federal employment with as clear a record as possible is to engage in settlement negotiations with the federal agency involved. Typically, in order for a federal agency to consider this, an individual likely needs an attorney to represent them. Otherwise, we have found that federal agencies do not tend to bother agreeing to formalize a settlement agreement. In many cases, federal agencies will not assign their own attorney to enter settlement negotiations until a federal employee has their own counsel.

Conversely, if an agency has not yet proposed a disciplinary action like removal, and an investigation is ongoing, resignation without an agreement may be a potential option for a federal employee but must be considered carefully.  Before doing so, it is very important to consult with an attorney experienced in federal employment law.

TYPES OF RESIGNATION SETTLEMENTS


Typically, one of the provisions that is helpful in negotiating resignation settlements in these types of cases involves getting a federal agency to agree to a clause where they agree to rescind the proposed removal action. Other settlement clauses can include confidentiality agreements, other types of clear record agreements, along with other provisions to protect a federal employee. A federal employee cannot and should not rely on verbal promises by federal agency Human Resources that they will handle a resignation in a certain way. A verbal promise tends to be worth very little and leaves little recourse to the federal employee involved. It is very important to get the terms of a resignation agreement in writing.

CONCLUSION

When a federal employee is facing a proposed adverse action (i.e. proposed removal) issues it is important to obtain legal advice and potential representation. Our law firm represents federal employees in this process. We can be contacted at www.berrylegal.com or by telephone at (703) 668-0070. Our Facebook page is located at http://facebook.com/BerryBerryPllc

Responding to Proposed Discipline for Federal Employees

Sample Proposed Disciplinary Action

By John V. Berry, Esq., www.berrylegal.com 

We often represent and defend federal employees in proposed disciplinary actions. When a federal employee is facing proposed discipline it is important for them to speak with an attorney knowledgeable in federal employment law for legal advice and representation. This article outlines some key points for federal employees as they respond to proposed disciplinary actions. We have also drafted a Sample Proposed Action, a hypothetical proposed removal, so that federal employees can better understand how a disciplinary action starts.  Continue reading

Federal Employee Law Blog Begins

 

By John V. Berry, Esq., www.berrylegal.com

Berry & Berry, PLLC, attorneys specializing in federal employment law matters before the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals, the Office of Special Counsel, and many other federal administrative agencies are proud to announce their new blog, which provides information on various areas of interest to federal employees.