GovernmentExecutive.com

A congressional panel on Wednesday considered a professional association's proposal to create a "super court" for federal employee appeals in the interest of greater efficiency.

The Senior Executives Association - a group that advocates for career federal executives - has called for the establishment of a Federal Employees Appeals Court. The new court would accept appeals now handled by the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Federal Labor Relations Authority, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Office of Special Counsel and the Office of Personnel Management.

In a hearing before the House Government Reform Subcommittee on the Federal Workforce and Agency Organization, chaired by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., SEA general counsel William Bransford testified that a super court would speed the often laborious appeals process and stop appeals from being routed through multiple agencies.

"This new court would replace all existing appeals systems," Bransford said. "[It] would provide a simple and expeditious mechanism, resulting in protection of the merit system by resolving employee concerns with relative speed, impartiality and fairness, while preserving all employee appeals rights."

Managers are often kept in the dark about the details of the investigation and appeals process, which can leave them uncomfortable and unable to properly discipline or rate performances as they continue to work with the unhappy employee, Bransford testified.

But the heads of the MSPB, EEOC and FLRA testified that their agencies' functions do not greatly overlap, and that consolidation should be carefully studied before moving ahead.

For instance, FLRA chairman Dale Cabaniss said that by law, FLRA does not address issues that can be brought to the MSPB, eliminating overlap between the two bodies.

Witnesses agreed that the appeals process takes too long, particularly with the EEOC.

But EEOC Chairwoman Cari Dominguez said the delays in the EEOC process are primarily the fault of individual agencies that investigate discrimination charges.

"I am convinced that the greatest delay occurs during the investigative process conducted by federal agencies," Dominguez said. "There is a reluctance to look at the merits of the case and then apply some judgment...[there is] reluctance by agencies to conduct anything less than a through investigation...even when allegations do not warrant such a review."

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-D.C, said the delays rest in the investigative process, and argued that creating a super court would increase bureaucracy and could make matters worse.

"Aren't we kind of putting the cart before the horse?" Norton asked. "Wouldn't it be better [to] get these cases early so whatever appeals process we decide upon would have fewer cases in the first place?"

Porter emphasized that the hearing was the start of discussions on how to improve the employee appeals process, but expects to "come up with a final answer in the not too distant future."

National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley said she opposes the SEA proposal because it creates an "unwieldy conglomerate agency." She said the union asked to testify at the hearing but was not allowed. Both NTEU and the American Federation of Government Employees submitted written testimony to the subcommittee, challenging the idea of a super court.

COMMENTS

• My husband just went through the MSPB for an unfair removal after 23 years of exceptional service including winning a monetary award. He had e-mails to prove that every one of the witnesses were lying. A new staff came in and he was targeted to be removed because he was not part of the "new gang" and he originally hails from Iran. He was left out of staff meetings, his job was changed to an overhire, and then for the last straw he was ordered to move to a cubicle. He refused to move and went through the proper channels without success so they fired him. The AJ ruled in the agency's favor not even mentioning lie after lie that was told by agency witnesses under oath. The whole thing was a joke. My husband is now blacklisted, we have a mortage payment to make, and 3 daughters about to enter college. I have no idea what we are going to do. This is a sad sad situation and something needs to be done about this. I am a Cindy Sheehan at heart (it's my Irish blood) and if someone can tell me how to publicize this and do something about it I will be right on the streets of D.C. This can go on no longer. Kathy Posted April 7, 2007 10:58 AM
• I just finished a MSPB hearing before Judge Sherry Armstrong Zamora, a few weeks ago, where she held for the agency. She had decided to hold in their favor before we even hit the hearing room in Alexandria. The Department of the Army, WRAMC, violated my client’s right to privacy by accessing her FECA files and using them against her for a removal from federal service. The agency promised not to introduce the files against us in lieu of not giving us copies notwithstanding discovery requests. Zamora allowed them to introduce the evidence from the files regardless. DOL, OWCP sent me multiple letters stating that FECA files cannot be released without a written waiver of confidentiality. But AJ Zamora issued the MSPB subpoenas notwithstanding to get at the files. DOL would not comply with her subpoena. An executive agency is not a court under the privacy act. Zamora took her anger out on the appellant. Therefore, anything will work better than a MSPB hearing. We have filed a formal Petition for Review with the Board. John H. Kitchings Jr. Posted March 14, 2006 9:38 PM
• I had an EEO pre-complaint out when I worked at DoD-Navy in Philadelphia just before I quit. Before formally filing a complaint -- thus making the horrendous management and do-nothing captain over there look bad -- I was forced to try to mediate the complaint with a contractor who was ultimately paid to discourage me from pressing forward with my complaint. His techniques ranged from intimidation to passing on threats that the management wanted to relay to me but didn't have the guts to. He even said that if I filed a complaint I would never work for the government again. He did admit that I had a case. They should be downsizing EEO, not adding more bodies to the problem. GovExec.com reader Posted November 15, 2005 10:32 AM