TOPICS
TOPICS
Quest for Justice
Former Park Police Chief Teresa Chambers sued the Interior Department Thursday for illegally destroying documents that she believes prove that the charges used to fire her last year were fabricated.
Chambers' lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, is an attempt to force the release of the documents, or compensation for their destruction, if they cannot be produced.
The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Chambers by the Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, asked for performance evaluations of Chambers prepared by Deputy Park Service Director Donald Murphy. In December 2003 Murphy charged Chambers with misconduct relating to chain-of-command breaches and other performance violations.
"For Deputy Park Service Director Don Murphy the question is which time was he telling the truth -- when he said he prepared an evaluation, or when he said he has no record of the evaluation," said PEER General Counsel Richard Condit. "If Murphy's evaluation of Chief Chambers supported their charges, why have they been hiding it?"
The lawsuit is filed under the 1974 Privacy Act, which allows federal workers to see their personnel records maintained by their agencies.
Chambers believes that if her personnel documents were made available, the court would reject two of the six charges used to justify her termination. The Merit Systems Protection Board has already dismissed two additional charges.
Park Service spokeswomen Elaine Sevy said the agency will not comment on ongoing personnel processes, especially since the case is headed toward litigation.
In December 2003, after telling The Washington Post that her 620-member police force needed to more than double its size to meet increased demands, the Park Service placed Chambers on administrative leave. She told the Post that the agency faced a $12 million budget shortfall and needed $8 million more than what had been requested for fiscal 2005.
After the article made headlines, Murphy placed Chambers under a gag order and on administrative leave and proposed to have her fired.
An MSPB judge upheld Chambers' firing and she has since appealed the initial decision and reapplied for her old job.
Assaulting Supervisors
A Transportation Security Administration assistant security director, fired after complaining that her boss brought an assault rifle to work, was rehired with a 5 percent pay raise after she filed a whistleblower complaint.
The employee, whose name was withheld for personnel reasons, was the acting assistant federal security director at an airport. Her supervisor, the acting federal security director, brought his personal assault rifle onto government property, which was against the law and unnecessary for his work responsibilities.
After reporting the assault rifle incident to TSA's Office of Inspector General, the supervisor ordered an investigation of the assistant security director in retaliation less than a month after the incident. Shortly after that investigation was opened, she was placed on administrative leave and eventually fired.
The employee filed a complaint with the Office of Special Counsel in June 2004 and a subsequent TSA investigation confirmed her allegation regarding the supervisor's assault rifle. The supervisor was suspended for one day and is no longer in that position.
After filing the OSC complaint, the worker was granted a stay of her firing by the Merit Systems Protection Board a month after TSA dismissed her.
In a settlement agreement, TSA agreed to reassign the worker to a new airport, pay a majority of her relocation costs and attorney's fees, and give her a 5 percent pay raise. TSA did not admit liability in the settlement and the worker agreed to withdraw her OSC and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaints.
Special Counsel Scott Bloch commended the TSA worker for reporting the problems in her workplace. "Whistleblowers should not have to fear reprisal and we will make sure they are protected," he said.
COMMENTS
- As to the TSA case, isn't it amazing that the lady had to resort to this to prove her point and to get her job back. Makes you wonder who the dummy is that made the decision to fire her. What really gets me going is the article indicates that TSA paid only a majority of her relocation and attorney fees. TSA was clearly at fault and should have paid all costs. Also no mention of back pay. What a sorry act. Also it goes on to say TSA admitted no liability. Standard government agency response. Never accept responsibility. Don't expect any help from Bush. He's as good as the next in passing the buck, not admitting mistakes and not taking responsibility. GovExec.com reader Posted February 28, 2005 7:33 AM
- Federal employees need to wise up. They all should realize by now the MSPB is a pro-goverment agency. They only rule less than 10% of the time in favor of the complaintant. BUSH should get rid of this agency as soon as possible. This case only goes to show what I am saying. The MSPB is flatly no good. It is a cog in what could otherwise be a good avenue for employees' complaints. It is getting to the point that no one has control of these supervisors and agency directors. It is time this crap ended. Charlie Posted February 25, 2005 11:27 AM
- This is just shocking: "The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Chambers by the Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, asked for performance evaluations of Chambers prepared by Deputy Park Service Director Donald Murphy. In December 2003 Murphy charged Chambers with misconduct relating to chain-of-command breaches and other performance violations." How can you have an MSPB Administrative Judge decision supporting the removal of this alleged whistleblower in 2003/2004 based on poor performance without DoI/NPS releasing her 2003 Performance Appraisal? All federal employees have a statutory and regulatory right to their OPF and their Performance Files. Equally shocking is that Ms. Chambers doesn't have a copy of her 2003 Performance Appraisal. If they didn't prepare one they should just say so and if they did and didn't give her a copy- shame on them. In any case Mr. Murphy's PA should itself reflect his poor supervision of NPS employees and the embarrassment he has caused the Department over this issue. What kind of shoddy performance management system is the Department of Interior running? Hopefully, if and when they go to pay for performance this will improve or they will be in very serious trouble. HR Specialist GovExec.com reader Posted February 25, 2005 8:53 AM









