GovernmentExecutive.com

In February, Phillip Otto decided to extend a work trip to New Orleans by three days to enjoy a short vacation.

But on the day Otto, an employee at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, planned to fly home to Baltimore, a massive snowstorm hit the East Coast, closing airports. Otto remained stranded in New Orleans for two more days than he had planned. He finally got a flight out, but had to change his route and land in Richmond, Va. instead of Baltimore.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid denied Otto's request for reimbursement of the hotel, meal and incidental expenses he incurred while stranded in New Orleans. In addition, the agency asked him to pay the $18 difference between the price of the ticket for his original return route and the flight landing in Richmond.

The General Services Administration agreed that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services are not responsible for covering Otto's expenses on the days he remained "marooned" in New Orleans.

Previous decisions have established that "when an employee who is traveling on official business deviates from the planned trip for personal reasons, the employee is liable for any additional costs which result from that change," the board said in an Aug. 18 ruling. "We do not believe that any of these decisions, or the principles they enunciate are, as Mr. Otto thinks, 'arcane and badly in need of reinvention.'"

The board also agreed that Otto owes the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services $18. Before embarking on his trip, Otto received $179 for his planned return flight to Baltimore. Since his actual return flight to Richmond cost $161, he owes his employer the $18 he saved, the board reasoned.

Phillip V. Otto v. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, General Services Administration Board of Contract Appeals (16192-TRAV), Aug. 18, 2003

Government and Politics

The Postal Service has until Oct. 13 to fire an employee who refused to quit her job to run for political office, the Merit Systems Protection Board decided Monday.

The ruling, handed down by an MSPB administrative law judge, grants the Office of Special Counsel's March request to discipline Glenda Payne Eudy, a mail distribution clerk in Charlotte, N.C., for violating the 1887 Hatch Act.

That act restricts the political activities of federal employees and some state and local workers who deal with federally funded programs. Agencies can fire workers who violate the act, or can place them on a 30-day suspension.

In July 2002, Eudy announced that she was running for a seat in the North Carolina state legislature. The Postal Service informed her that the Hatch Act required her to either quit her job immediately or withdraw from the election. But Eudy did not quit her job and placed her name on the Sept. 10, 2002 primary ballot for North Carolina's 109th district.

The MSPB agreed with OSC that Eudy broke the law by running for a partisan office, and added that her "decision to remain a candidate in the face of the many warnings against her decision was a significant aggravating factor in support of her removal."

Even though Eudy had a favorable work record, ran a brief campaign and expressed remorse for her decision to remain at work during the election, the Postal Service should still fire her, MSPB decided.

Office of Special Counsel announcement, Sept. 10, 2003

Post a Comment

To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.