TOPICS
TOPICS
Special counsel says first veterans case will set employment precedent
The first case brought brought to the Merit Systems Protection Board involving a federal agency accused of violating the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act will set an important precedent for federal agencies and managers, according to Office of Special Counsel chief Scott Bloch.
The case, which is being brought by the special counsel against the U.S. Postal Service, was initiated in June and is set for an MSPB hearing in early January.
"That's a rather quick hearing date ... we've really pushed that," Bloch said Thursday during an interview with Government Executive. "We feel it is an important case that underscores the importance of enforcing the nondiscrimination parts of USERRA."
The Postal Service declined to comment on the case. A spokesman said the agency typically does not release statements on pending litigation.
USERRA, passed in 1994, protects the employment rights of National Guard members and reservists who are called up to active duty. Under the law, demobilized reservists are guaranteed their old positions, any seniority they would have accrued and full benefits. The act also protects against a federal employee's reserve service from negatively affecting their career.
The Government Accountability Office released a report recently that criticized the amount of time OSC has taken to process USERRA cases. Bloch said, however, that he has made veteran's rights a priority since assuming control of the office in early 2004.
In the Postal Service case, the reservist alleged that his military duties were the motivating factor in his dismissal from a 16-week associate supervisory training program. The Labor Department's Veterans' Employment and Training Service - which is the first office to see veterans' employment cases - determined that the complaint had merit, but the agency could not reach a settlement with the Postal Service. The case was then turned over to OSC.
"We filed that only because the agency would not do the right thing with regard to the Postal Service employee," Bloch said during a July interview with a Defense Department television station.
The Postal Service employee, who has been an Army reservist since 1971, was not able to attend supervisory training on Saturdays because of his military duties. According to the complaint, the Postal Service expressed concern about the missed training time and that the employee would not be able to work on Saturdays after graduating from the course - as junior supervisors are expected to do. In April 2000, the employee was dismissed from the supervisory training program.
Bloch said it was necessary to provide a "disincentive" for other agencies to make similar decisions.
I think it's important to send a strong message to employers that we mean business," Bloch told Government Executive. "Not only are the going to suffer a lawsuit, they are going to be publicly held up and held accountable for this."
COMMENTS
- OK, I guess that I am Mystery Person. I thought that I had read the article. A government office ran an official action on a Saturday. There are some religions that do not allow their adherents to work on Saturday. Therefore, the federal government cannot require this for the job. IF the office wants the training, hold it on government time. That way the reservist would only have an issue when he/she is deployed. I find the fault with the government rules, and laws, not the reservist. Was the office paying overtime for the training? Did the job requirements state that Saturday and Sunday work were required? I don't know, but if it were not explicit, and covered with rationale then it is not a requirement. More to the point, what we had here was the government fighting to violate its own laws and rules. Where is the outrage for the fraud waste and abuse in this? Instead all I read is folks who do not like the special benefits of being a reservist while a federal employee. GovExec.com reader Posted November 2, 2004 3:31 PM
- Dear Mystery Person.....evidently you didn't take the time to read and understand the issue. The reservest signed up for a supervisory training program knowing full well that as a supervisory trainee he would be required to attend Saturday training. The Saturday work was a requirement both during training and after he bacame a new supervisor. The issue, as I understand it, is that if he can't devote the Saturday training time to the job, then he shouldn't have applied for the job. And, if they did make an exception in his case for training, he then would not be able to carry out his responsibilities as a new supervisor by working the Saturday shift as required.....I fail to see where his employer did anything wrong. Mike Page Posted October 28, 2004 10:07 AM
- Dear Queen of the Flunkies, Mike Page, and Toni; You may not like it, I may not like it, but it is the law that you cannot take adverse action against someone for their participation in the Reserves/Guard. When I was on active duty (now retired) it griped me that the reservist civil servants got leave, and military leave, while I only got leave. But those are the rules. Supposedly the Feds want to be the poster child for how to be a good employer. If you do not like the present system, try working through your Congressional representative to change the law, but... If you are a Federal Worker, please note that insuring that the management inforces all of the laws and rules are in the worker's best interests. Here where they evidently flaunted Federal law, you have to wonder, what other violations did they do? Were merit systems principles upheld in other actions? I sort of doubt it. The comment was made that "We all make choices in our careers". Well the career that both the veteran and we made has specific allowances and rules to encourage this type of action. Don't blame the veteran for a rule/law that you do not like, get the rule/law changed. GovExec.com reader Posted October 27, 2004 10:46 AM
