Misplaced Pages

United States Merit Systems Protection Board: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:20, 4 March 2015 edit70.192.203.127 (talk) References← Previous edit Latest revision as of 14:58, 22 December 2024 edit undoAlexander Bonaparte Caesar (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,230 edits Board members 
(178 intermediate revisions by 74 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Independent quasi-judicial agency}}
{{Infobox Government agency {{Infobox Government agency
|agency_name = Merit Systems Protection Board | agency_name = Merit Systems Protection Board
| logo = Seal of the United States Merit Systems Protection Board.svg
|logo = US-MeritSystemsProtectionBoard-Seal.svg
|logo_width = 200px | logo_width = 200px
|formed = 1978 | formed = {{Start date|1979|01|01}}
|preceding1 = United States Civil Service Commission | preceding1 = United States Civil Service Commission
|jurisdiction = ] | jurisdiction = ]
|headquarters = ] | headquarters = ]
|employees = | employees =
|budget = | budget =
|chief1_name = ] | chief1_name = ]
|chief1_position = Chairman | chief1_position = Chair
|chief2_name = | chief2_name = ]
|chief2_position = | chief2_position = Vice Chair
|chief3_name = | chief3_name = ]
|chief3_position = | chief3_position = Member
|child1_agency = | child1_agency =
|website = | website = {{official URL|https://www.mspb.gov/}}
|footnotes = | footnotes =
}} }}
The '''Merit Systems Protection Board''' ('''MSPB''') is an independent ] established in 1979 to protect federal merit systems against partisan political and other prohibited personnel practices and to ensure adequate protection for ] against abuses by agency management. The '''Merit Systems Protection Board''' ('''MSPB''') is an independent ] established in 1979 to protect federal merit systems against partisan political and other prohibited personnel practices and to ensure adequate protection for ] against abuses by agency management.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Shimabukuro |first1=Jon O. |last2=Staman |first2=Jennifer A. |title=Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB): A Legal Overview |date=March 25, 2019 |publisher=Congressional Research Service |location=Washington, DC |url=https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R45630.pdf |access-date=29 March 2019 |archive-date=29 March 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190329105143/https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R45630.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>


When an employee of most Executive Branch agencies is separated from his or her position, or suspended for more than 14 work days, the employee can request that an employee of MSPB conduct a ] into the matter by submitting an appeal, generally within 30 days.<ref>http://www.mspblawblog.com/2013/08/completing-and-submitting-an-mspb-appeal.html</ref> In that hearing, the agency will have to prove that the action was warranted and the employee will have the opportunity to present evidence that it was not. A decision of MSPB is binding unless set aside on appeal to federal court. Along with the ] and the ], the MSPB is a successor agency of the ], which was abolished in 1979. When an employee of most Executive Branch agencies is separated from his or her position, or suspended for more than 14 days, the employee can request that an employee of MSPB conduct a hearing into the matter by submitting an appeal, generally within 30 days.<ref>{{citation |url=http://www.mspblawblog.com/2013/08/completing-and-submitting-an-mspb-appeal.html |access-date=2015-08-02 |date=August 12, 2013 |work=MSPB Law Blog |title=Completing and Submitting an MSPB Appeal |first=John V. |last=Berry |archive-date=2015-05-18 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150518083531/http://www.mspblawblog.com/2013/08/completing-and-submitting-an-mspb-appeal.html |url-status=live }}</ref> In that hearing, the agency will have to prove that the action was warranted and the employee will have the opportunity to present evidence that it was not. A decision of MSPB is binding unless set aside on appeal to federal court. Along with the ] and the ], the MSPB is a successor agency of the ].
==Background==
The largest settlement since the inception of MSPB in 1979 was for $820,000 in ''Robert W. Whitmore v. Department of Labor''. The Board approved the settlement on June 5, 2013. Whitmore was fired after giving Congressional testimony that ]'s workplace injury and illness program was deliberately ineffective. Whitmore, who had worked for the ] for 37 years, was represented by noted DC plaintiff's employment lawyer Bob Seldon.


The board had gone without a ] for the entire ], with the last member retiring at the end of February 2019.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/this-grievance-board-for-federal-workers-has-one-person-left--and-hes-about-to-leave/2019/02/12/c573e446-296e-11e9-b011-d8500644dc98_story.html |title=This grievance board for federal workers has one person left — and he's about to leave |author=Lisa Rein |date=February 12, 2019 |website=WashingtonPost.com |access-date=February 14, 2019 |archive-date=February 13, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190213200731/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/this-grievance-board-for-federal-workers-has-one-person-left--and-hes-about-to-leave/2019/02/12/c573e446-296e-11e9-b011-d8500644dc98_story.html |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal-employees-will-wait-longer-for-their-grievances-to-be-heard/2019/02/15/680567f8-313e-11e9-813a-0ab2f17e305b_story.html|title=Federal employees will wait longer for their grievances to be heard|last=Rein|first=Lisa|date=February 15, 2019|newspaper=]|access-date=February 17, 2019|archive-date=February 17, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190217003119/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/federal-employees-will-wait-longer-for-their-grievances-to-be-heard/2019/02/15/680567f8-313e-11e9-813a-0ab2f17e305b_story.html|url-status=live}}</ref>
The largest settlement before Whitmore was for $755,000 to former ] lawyer, ], for his ] in 2005.<ref name="gm">Gretchen Morgenson, ''The New York Times'' (June 29, 2010). Retrieved March 1, 2011</ref> The SEC settled Aguirre's claim on June 29, 2009.<ref name="gm" />


Board quorum resumed on March 4, 2022 upon the swearing in of Raymond Limon and ].<ref>{{Cite web |title=U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board: Frequently Asked Questions about the Lack of Board Quorum and Lack of Board Members |url=https://www.mspb.gov/FAQs_Absence_of_Board_Quorum_March_4_2022.pdf}}</ref>
In January 2011, the Board ordered the ] to reinstate its former Chief, ], who had been fired in July 2004 for speaking to the '']'' about the consequences of Park Police staff shortages. The Board also found her entitled to retroactive pay dating back to July 2004 and her legal costs.<ref>O'Keefe, Ed. . '']'' (January 11, 2011). Retrieved March 11, 2011</ref>


==Function==
Generally, appeals are heard by the ]. However, appeals involving claims of ] are heard in ].<ref>{{UnitedStatesCode|5|7703}}(b)(2)</ref> Generally, appeals are heard by the ]. However, appeals involving claims of ] are heard in ].<ref>{{UnitedStatesCode|5|7703}}(b)(2)</ref>


Line 35: Line 35:
*Adjudicating appeals of administrative decisions affecting an individual's rights or benefits under the ] or the ] *Adjudicating appeals of administrative decisions affecting an individual's rights or benefits under the ] or the ]
*Adjudicating employee complaints filed under the ], the ], and the ] *Adjudicating employee complaints filed under the ], the ], and the ]
*Adjudicating cases brought by the Special Counsel, principally complaints of prohibited personnel practices and ] violations; *Adjudicating cases brought by the ] (OSC), principally complaints of prohibited personnel practices and ] violations;
*Adjudicating requests to review regulations of the Office of Personnel Management that are alleged to require or result in the commission of a prohibited personnel practice-or reviewing such regulations on the Board's own motion *Adjudicating requests to review regulations of the Office of Personnel Management that are alleged to require or result in the commission of a prohibited personnel practice-or reviewing such regulations on the Board's own motion
*Ordering compliance with final Board orders where appropriate *Ordering compliance with final Board orders where appropriate
*Conducting studies of the Federal civil service and other merit systems in the ] to determine whether they are free from prohibited personnel practices *Conducting studies of the Federal civil service and other merit systems in the ] to determine whether they are free from prohibited personnel practices


== Board members ==
==Merit Principles survey==
The Board is composed of three members, nominated by the ], with the ], for a term of seven years. By statute ({{USC|5|1201}}), "not more than 2 shall be adherents of the same political party". The chair of the board requires two separate Senate confirmations, one as a member of the board and one as chair. The President can designate a vice chair without Senate confirmation.<ref>{{cite web |title=U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board - Board Members |url=https://www.mspb.gov/About/members.htm |website=www.mspb.gov |access-date=26 June 2021}}</ref>


The current members of the MSPB {{as of|lc=y|df=US|2024|12|22}}:
The Merit Systems Protection Board surveyed federal employees in 1992 and 2010.<ref>Grundmann (2011)</ref> The response rate was 64 and 58 percent, netting approximately 13,000 and 42,000 responses in the 1992 and 2010 surveys, respectively. One question asked, "During the last 12 months, did you personally observe or obtain direct evidence of one or more illegal or wasteful activities involving your agency? In 1992, 17.7 percent of respondents answered yes. In 2010, only 11.1 percent of respondents answered yes.<ref>Grundmann (2011, p. 18/54)</ref>
{| class="wikitable sortable plainrowheaders" style="text-align:center"
|-
! scope="col" "width:20%" | Name
! scope="col" "width:15%" | Party
! scope="col" "width:15%" | Sworn in
! scope="col" "width:15%" | Term expires
|-
! scope="row" style="text-align:center;" | {{sortname|Cathy|Harris}}<br>{{small|(Chair)}}
| {{party shading/Democratic}} | Democratic
| {{dts|2022|06|01}}
| {{dts|2028|03|01}}
|-
! scope="row" style="text-align:center;" | {{sortname|Raymond|Limon}}<br>{{small|(Vice Chair)}}
| {{party shading/Democratic}} | Democratic
| {{dts|2022|03|04}}
| {{dts|2025|03|01}}
|-
! scope="row" style="text-align:center;" | {{sortname|Henry|Kerner}}
| {{party shading/Republican}} | Republican
| {{dts|2024|06|03}}
| {{dts|2030|03|01}}
|}


==Significant appeals==
"In 1992, 53 percent of respondents who made a disclosure reported that they were identified as the source. In 2010, 43 percent reported that they were identified."<ref>Grundmann (2011, p. 23/54)</ref> While the trend is in the right direction, "In both 1992 and 2010, approximately one-third of the individuals who felt they had been identified as a source of a report of wrongdoing also perceived either threats or acts of reprisal, or both".<ref>Grundmann (2011, p. 13/54)</ref> "To qualify for protection under the Whistleblower Protection Act, the individual must be disclosing a violation of a law, rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; a gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety."<ref>Grundmann (2011, p. 18/54)</ref> Only certain official personnel actions are prohibited; other forms of retaliation are still legal.<ref>Grundmann (2011, p. 23/54)</ref>
The largest settlement since the inception of MSPB in 1979 was for $820,000 in ''Robert W. Whitmore v. Department of Labor''.<ref>Davidson, Joe. . '']'' (June 12, 2013). Retrieved October 14, 2021</ref> The Board approved the settlement on June 5, 2013. Whitmore was fired after giving Congressional testimony that the ]'s workplace injury and illness program was deliberately ineffective. Whitmore had worked for the ] for 37 years.

The largest settlement before Whitmore was for $755,000 to former ] lawyer ], for his ] in 2005.<ref name="gm">Gretchen Morgenson, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180412001109/https://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/30/business/30sec.html?_r=1 |date=2018-04-12 }} ''The New York Times'' (June 29, 2010). Retrieved March 1, 2011</ref> The SEC settled Aguirre's claim on June 29, 2009.<ref name="gm" />

In January 2011, the Board ordered the ] to reinstate its former chief, ], who had been fired in July 2004 for speaking to the '']'' about the consequences of Park Police staff shortages. The Board also found her entitled to retroactive pay dating back to July 2004 and legal costs.<ref>O'Keefe, Ed. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121009173450/http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2011/01/fired_park_police_reinstated.html |date=2012-10-09 }}. '']'' (January 11, 2011). Retrieved March 11, 2011</ref>

==Merit Principles survey==

The Merit Systems Protection Board surveyed federal employees in 1992 and 2010.<ref>Grundmann (2011)</ref> The response rate was 64 and 58 percent, netting approximately 13,000 and 42,000 responses in the 1992 and 2010 surveys, respectively. One question asked, "During the last 12 months, did you personally observe or obtain direct evidence of one or more illegal or wasteful activities involving your agency?" In 1992, 17.7 percent of respondents answered yes. In 2010, only 11.1 percent of respondents answered yes.<ref name="Grundmann 2011, p. 18/54">Grundmann (2011, p. 18/54)</ref>

In 1992, 53 percent of respondents who made a disclosure reported that they were identified as the source. In 2010, 43 percent reported that they were identified.<ref name="Grundmann 2011, p. 23/54">Grundmann (2011, p. 23/54)</ref> In both 1992 and 2010, approximately one-third of the individuals who felt they had been identified as a source of a report of wrongdoing also perceived either threats or acts of reprisal, or both.<ref>Grundmann (2011, p. 13/54)</ref> To qualify for protection under the Whistleblower Protection Act, the individual must be disclosing a violation of a law, rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; a gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.<ref name="Grundmann 2011, p. 18/54"/> Only certain official personnel actions are prohibited; other forms of retaliation remain permissible.<ref name="Grundmann 2011, p. 23/54"/>


==Criticism== ==Criticism==
There are complaints that the MSPB has gone far beyond protecting civil servants from unjustified disciplinary action. Rather, critics allege, the MSPB now makes it nearly impossible to fire poor performers or problematic employees, even when they have committed egregious violations that would result in immediate termination in the private sector. According to the CEO of the ], "There is no question that taxpayers are losing hundreds of millions of dollars, in a conservative estimate. They are losing more than that because they are losing the ability to get the very best out of government."<ref>{{cite news| title =Red tape keeps some bad gov't workers from being fired| publisher =CBS News| date =2 March 2015| url =http://www.cbsnews.com/news/civil-servant-protection-system-could-keep-problematic-government-employees-from-being-fired/| archive-date =3 March 2015| archive-url =https://web.archive.org/web/20150303181842/http://www.cbsnews.com/news/civil-servant-protection-system-could-keep-problematic-government-employees-from-being-fired/| url-status =live}}</ref><ref>{{YouTube| t9LbIpQsbeo | "CBS: Govt Inability to Fire Bad Employees Like EPA's Porn-Watcher Costing Taxpayers Millions" }}</ref>
There are complaints that the MSPB continues to employ judges who fail to meet the most basic requirements of being a judge and that is to be fair and impartial This is illustrated in the judges rulings and statistics report which publicizes the facts that MSPB judges rule over 97% percent in favor of the government and against federal government employees a statistically highly improbable if not impossible percentage of the time, especially when compared to similar cases in non-MSPB courts. <ref>www.mspb.gov</ref> Some have even requested to have the option of having an impartial person flip a coin to determine the outcome of their case in order to have a fair decision, unfortunately such requests were denied.


However, statistics gathered by the MSPB state that in 2014, a total of 15,925 appeals were filed with the MSPB. Of those, 5,283 were dismissed, 1,093 were settled, and 9,549 were adjudicated by way of initial decisions made by MSPB administrative judges and administrative law judges. In those initial decisions, the MSPB affirmed the employing agency's decision 9,348 times (nearly 98% of the time), modified the employing agency's decision or mitigated the penalty imposed 21 times, and reversed the employing Agency's decision 169 times. The Presidentially-appointed Board members granted review of 170 initial decisions, remanding the case for further review in 112 cases, reversing the initial decisions of MSPB administrative judges and administrative law judges in 30 cases, affirming the initial decision in 18 cases, and taking another action in 10 cases.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190218021123/https://www.mspb.gov/netsearch/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=1179694&version=1184281 |date=2019-02-18 }}, May 29, 2015. United States Merit Systems Protection Board.</ref>
There are complaints that the MSPB has gone far beyond protecting civil servants from unjustified disciplinary action. Rather, the MSPB now makes it nearly impossible to fire poor performers or problematic employees, even when they have committed egregious violations that would result in immediate termination in the private sector. According to the CEO of the ], ''"There is no question that taxpayers are losing hundreds of millions of dollars, in a conservative estimate. They are losing more than that because they are losing the ability to get the very best out of government."''<ref>{{cite news|title=Red tape keeps some bad gov't workers from being fired| publisher =CBS News| date =2 March 2015| url =http://www.cbsnews.com/news/civil-servant-protection-system-could-keep-problematic-government-employees-from-being-fired/| accessdate = }}</ref><ref>{{YouTube| t9LbIpQsbeo | "CBS: Govt Inability to Fire Bad Employees Like EPA's Porn-Watcher Costing Taxpayers Millions" }}</ref>

From January 7, 2017 to March 3, 2022, the MSPB lacked a quorum consisting of two members.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.mspb.gov/About/members.htm|title=U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board: Board Members|website=www.mspb.gov|access-date=2017-08-06|archive-date=2017-06-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170607014419/https://www.mspb.gov/about/members.htm|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=ogrysko>Ogrysko, N. (2018, Nov 28). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190121121833/https://federalnewsnetwork.com/all-news/2018/11/a-member-less-mspb-more-likely-as-senate-committee-fails-to-clear-pending-nominees/ |date=2019-01-21 }}. Federal News Network. Retrieved Jan 19, 2019.</ref><ref></ref> It is the longest the agency has been without a quorum in its history.<ref name=ogrysko /> Without a quorum, the "Board will be unable to issue decisions that require a majority vote" until more members are appointed by the president.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.mspb.gov/MSPBSEARCH/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=1376654&version=1382029&application=ACROBAT|title=Frequently Asked Questions about the Lack of Board Quorum|date=January 25, 2017|website=www.mspb.gov|access-date=August 6, 2017|archive-date=February 11, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170211162815/http://www.mspb.gov/MSPBSEARCH/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=1376654&version=1382029&application=ACROBAT|url-status=live}}</ref> Effectively, this meant that no new substantive decisions are being issued and the backlog of cases awaiting a final disposition is increasing. As of March 2019, the last member's term had expired and the Senate had not acted on President Trump's nominations. With a vacant board, its general counsel becomes the acting executive and administrative officer, and administrative judges still hear cases and issue initial decisions.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/board-that-handles-federal-worker-disputes-is-now-vacant/2019/03/01/5e5efdd0-3c48-11e9-b10b-f05a22e75865_story.html |date=March 1, 2019 |first=Juliet |last=Linderman |title=Board that handles federal worker disputes is now vacant |agency=Associated Press |newspaper=The Washington Post |access-date=March 6, 2019 |archive-date=March 7, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190307112349/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/board-that-handles-federal-worker-disputes-is-now-vacant/2019/03/01/5e5efdd0-3c48-11e9-b10b-f05a22e75865_story.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>

On March 4, 2022, President Biden's nominees Vice Chair Raymond Limon and Member Tristan Leavitt were sworn in to the MSPB, leading to the restoration of a quorum.<ref></ref>

==History==
It was established as an independent agency by Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1978 ({{USFR|43|36037}}, {{USStat|92|3783}}), effective January 1, 1979, in accordance with EO 12107 ({{USFR|44|1055}}), December 28, 1978, and the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 ({{USStat|92|1111}}), October 13, 1978.<ref name=MSPB-records>{{Cite news|url=https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/479.html|title=Records of the Merit Systems Protection Board |date=2016-08-15|work=National Archives|access-date=2017-11-02|language=en|archive-date=2017-11-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171107005516/https://www.archives.gov/research/guide-fed-records/groups/479.html|url-status=live}}</ref>


==See also== ==See also==
*] *]
*] *]
*]
*
*


==Notes== ==Notes==
Line 61: Line 101:


==References== ==References==
{{Citation * {{Citation
| last = Grundmann | last = Grundmann
| first =Susan Tsui | first =Susan Tsui
|date=November 2011 |date=November 2011
| title = Blowing The Whistle: Barriers to Federal Employees Making Disclosures | title = Blowing The Whistle: Barriers to Federal Employees Making Disclosures
| publisher = U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board | publisher = U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board
| url =http://www.mspb.gov/netsearch/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=662503&version=664475 | url =http://www.mspb.gov/netsearch/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=662503&version=664475
| accessdate =August 24, 2013}} | access-date =August 24, 2013}}

((Citation
| last = Watch.org
| first = MSPB
| date=March 2015
| title = MSPB Statistics and Visual Aids
| publisher = MSPB Watch
| url =http://mspbwatch.org/projects/statistics/


==External links== ==External links==
* {{official website|https://www.mspb.gov/}}
*
* in the ] * in the ]
* (privately owned website) * (privately owned website)
*


{{authority control}}


] ]
]
]

Latest revision as of 14:58, 22 December 2024

Independent quasi-judicial agency
Merit Systems Protection Board
Agency overview
FormedJanuary 1, 1979 (1979-01-01)
Preceding agency
  • United States Civil Service Commission
JurisdictionFederal government of the United States
HeadquartersWashington, D.C.
Agency executives
Websitewww.mspb.gov Edit this at Wikidata

The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) is an independent quasi-judicial agency established in 1979 to protect federal merit systems against partisan political and other prohibited personnel practices and to ensure adequate protection for federal employees against abuses by agency management.

When an employee of most Executive Branch agencies is separated from his or her position, or suspended for more than 14 days, the employee can request that an employee of MSPB conduct a hearing into the matter by submitting an appeal, generally within 30 days. In that hearing, the agency will have to prove that the action was warranted and the employee will have the opportunity to present evidence that it was not. A decision of MSPB is binding unless set aside on appeal to federal court. Along with the Office of Personnel Management and the Federal Labor Relations Authority, the MSPB is a successor agency of the United States Civil Service Commission.

The board had gone without a quorum for the entire Trump administration, with the last member retiring at the end of February 2019.

Board quorum resumed on March 4, 2022 upon the swearing in of Raymond Limon and Tristan Leavitt.

Function

Generally, appeals are heard by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. However, appeals involving claims of discrimination are heard in federal district court.

The Board carries out its statutory mission by:

Board members

The Board is composed of three members, nominated by the President of the United States, with the advice and consent of the Senate, for a term of seven years. By statute (5 U.S.C. § 1201), "not more than 2 shall be adherents of the same political party". The chair of the board requires two separate Senate confirmations, one as a member of the board and one as chair. The President can designate a vice chair without Senate confirmation.

The current members of the MSPB as of December 22, 2024:

Name Party Sworn in Term expires
Cathy Harris
(Chair)
Democratic June 1, 2022 March 1, 2028
Raymond Limon
(Vice Chair)
Democratic March 4, 2022 March 1, 2025
Henry Kerner Republican June 3, 2024 March 1, 2030

Significant appeals

The largest settlement since the inception of MSPB in 1979 was for $820,000 in Robert W. Whitmore v. Department of Labor. The Board approved the settlement on June 5, 2013. Whitmore was fired after giving Congressional testimony that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's workplace injury and illness program was deliberately ineffective. Whitmore had worked for the Bureau of Labor Statistics for 37 years.

The largest settlement before Whitmore was for $755,000 to former Securities and Exchange Commission lawyer Gary J. Aguirre, for his wrongful termination in 2005. The SEC settled Aguirre's claim on June 29, 2009.

In January 2011, the Board ordered the US Park Police to reinstate its former chief, Teresa Chambers, who had been fired in July 2004 for speaking to the Washington Post about the consequences of Park Police staff shortages. The Board also found her entitled to retroactive pay dating back to July 2004 and legal costs.

Merit Principles survey

The Merit Systems Protection Board surveyed federal employees in 1992 and 2010. The response rate was 64 and 58 percent, netting approximately 13,000 and 42,000 responses in the 1992 and 2010 surveys, respectively. One question asked, "During the last 12 months, did you personally observe or obtain direct evidence of one or more illegal or wasteful activities involving your agency?" In 1992, 17.7 percent of respondents answered yes. In 2010, only 11.1 percent of respondents answered yes.

In 1992, 53 percent of respondents who made a disclosure reported that they were identified as the source. In 2010, 43 percent reported that they were identified. In both 1992 and 2010, approximately one-third of the individuals who felt they had been identified as a source of a report of wrongdoing also perceived either threats or acts of reprisal, or both. To qualify for protection under the Whistleblower Protection Act, the individual must be disclosing a violation of a law, rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement; a gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety. Only certain official personnel actions are prohibited; other forms of retaliation remain permissible.

Criticism

There are complaints that the MSPB has gone far beyond protecting civil servants from unjustified disciplinary action. Rather, critics allege, the MSPB now makes it nearly impossible to fire poor performers or problematic employees, even when they have committed egregious violations that would result in immediate termination in the private sector. According to the CEO of the Partnership for Public Service, "There is no question that taxpayers are losing hundreds of millions of dollars, in a conservative estimate. They are losing more than that because they are losing the ability to get the very best out of government."

However, statistics gathered by the MSPB state that in 2014, a total of 15,925 appeals were filed with the MSPB. Of those, 5,283 were dismissed, 1,093 were settled, and 9,549 were adjudicated by way of initial decisions made by MSPB administrative judges and administrative law judges. In those initial decisions, the MSPB affirmed the employing agency's decision 9,348 times (nearly 98% of the time), modified the employing agency's decision or mitigated the penalty imposed 21 times, and reversed the employing Agency's decision 169 times. The Presidentially-appointed Board members granted review of 170 initial decisions, remanding the case for further review in 112 cases, reversing the initial decisions of MSPB administrative judges and administrative law judges in 30 cases, affirming the initial decision in 18 cases, and taking another action in 10 cases.

From January 7, 2017 to March 3, 2022, the MSPB lacked a quorum consisting of two members. It is the longest the agency has been without a quorum in its history. Without a quorum, the "Board will be unable to issue decisions that require a majority vote" until more members are appointed by the president. Effectively, this meant that no new substantive decisions are being issued and the backlog of cases awaiting a final disposition is increasing. As of March 2019, the last member's term had expired and the Senate had not acted on President Trump's nominations. With a vacant board, its general counsel becomes the acting executive and administrative officer, and administrative judges still hear cases and issue initial decisions.

On March 4, 2022, President Biden's nominees Vice Chair Raymond Limon and Member Tristan Leavitt were sworn in to the MSPB, leading to the restoration of a quorum.

History

It was established as an independent agency by Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1978 (43 FR 36037, 92 Stat. 3783), effective January 1, 1979, in accordance with EO 12107 (44 FR 1055), December 28, 1978, and the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (92 Stat. 1111), October 13, 1978.

See also

Notes

  1. Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Staman, Jennifer A. (March 25, 2019). Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB): A Legal Overview (PDF). Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 March 2019. Retrieved 29 March 2019.
  2. Berry, John V. (August 12, 2013), "Completing and Submitting an MSPB Appeal", MSPB Law Blog, archived from the original on 2015-05-18, retrieved 2015-08-02
  3. Lisa Rein (February 12, 2019). "This grievance board for federal workers has one person left — and he's about to leave". WashingtonPost.com. Archived from the original on February 13, 2019. Retrieved February 14, 2019.
  4. Rein, Lisa (February 15, 2019). "Federal employees will wait longer for their grievances to be heard". Washington Post. Archived from the original on February 17, 2019. Retrieved February 17, 2019.
  5. "U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board: Frequently Asked Questions about the Lack of Board Quorum and Lack of Board Members" (PDF).
  6. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2)
  7. "U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board - Board Members". www.mspb.gov. Retrieved 26 June 2021.
  8. Davidson, Joe. "Court indicates Labor went after employee for whistleblowing activities". Washington Post (June 12, 2013). Retrieved October 14, 2021
  9. ^ Gretchen Morgenson, "SEC Settles With a Former Lawyer" Archived 2018-04-12 at the Wayback Machine The New York Times (June 29, 2010). Retrieved March 1, 2011
  10. O'Keefe, Ed. "Fired Park Police chief Teresa Chambers ordered reinstated" Archived 2012-10-09 at the Wayback Machine. Washington Post (January 11, 2011). Retrieved March 11, 2011
  11. Grundmann (2011)
  12. ^ Grundmann (2011, p. 18/54)
  13. ^ Grundmann (2011, p. 23/54)
  14. Grundmann (2011, p. 13/54)
  15. "Red tape keeps some bad gov't workers from being fired". CBS News. 2 March 2015. Archived from the original on 3 March 2015.
  16. "CBS: Govt Inability to Fire Bad Employees Like EPA's Porn-Watcher Costing Taxpayers Millions" on YouTube
  17. United States Merit Systems Protection Board Annual Report for FY 2014 Archived 2019-02-18 at the Wayback Machine, May 29, 2015. United States Merit Systems Protection Board.
  18. "U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board: Board Members". www.mspb.gov. Archived from the original on 2017-06-07. Retrieved 2017-08-06.
  19. ^ Ogrysko, N. (2018, Nov 28). A member-less MSPB more likely as Senate committee fails to clear pending nominees Archived 2019-01-21 at the Wayback Machine. Federal News Network. Retrieved Jan 19, 2019.
  20. "Frequently Asked Questions about the Lack of Board Quorum". www.mspb.gov. January 25, 2017. Archived from the original on February 11, 2017. Retrieved August 6, 2017.
  21. Linderman, Juliet (March 1, 2019). "Board that handles federal worker disputes is now vacant". The Washington Post. Associated Press. Archived from the original on March 7, 2019. Retrieved March 6, 2019.
  22. "Records of the Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPB]". National Archives. 2016-08-15. Archived from the original on 2017-11-07. Retrieved 2017-11-02.

References

External links

Categories: