Illegal termination

[dean powell]

Jurisdiction

California

I do not know where to look for help as I have been unable to find an attorney to represent me. The problem is that the case sat in the EEO court since 2018 and then was dismissed without being heard. My former lawyer pretty much abandoned my when I filed a civil suit. So because of the lenth of time any lawyer I contacted that takes on cases on contingency have declined. My case is about to be dismissed. I was fired for misconduct / violence. An aquaintence of mine came to my worksite solely to cause havoc and get me in trouble. I never stuck back at her. Nobody was injured. Multiple witnesses have stated that she was the person hitting me. My supervisor believed she was mandated to fire me. She never even had a dicussion with me about the incident. I was a federal employee.

 

[adjusterjack]

I was a federal employee.

Aside from that I don't see any issue about her firing you, even though you were the "victim."

Did your supervisor fail to comply with termination guidelines?

 

[Tax Counsel]

I do not know where to look for help as I have been unable to find an attorney to represent me. The problem is that the case sat in the EEO court since 2018 and then was dismissed without being heard....I was a federal employee.

Ok, what federal agency did you work for? What was the date of termination and what administrative appeals did you take with your agency and OPM? What exactly is the EEO court you mentioned? And when did it dismiss your claim?

I used to be a federal employee and at the end of my federal government career, a management official. The first thing that strikes me as confusing is you mention EEO but your brief description of the event leading to your termination doesn't mention any claim of illegal discrimination by the agency. The second thing I notice is that you said that were fired for misconduct/violence as the result of an acquaintance showing up at work and causing "havoc". The details of that would be significant, but it's far easier for a federal agency to terminate you for violence or misconduct than it is for poor performance. If the incident involved some kind of physical altercation with the acquaintance, even if you didn't strike back, as you say, that is often going to be good enough to fire you.

My supervisor believed she was mandated to fire me.

Depending on the details of the incident as she understood them, she might not be far off in that belief. She has a responsibility to ensure the safety of the workplace and employees she supervises and if a scuffle or fight breaks out, she cannot just ignore that.

The most glaring legal problem I see is that the date of your termination was 2018 or earlier. That raises potential statute of limitation issues if you wish to sue in court over this.

Keep looking for a lawyer familiar with wrongful termination actions by federal government agencies. If a lawyer won't take the case, ask the lawyer why he or she won't take it and ask the lawyer how much time the lawyer believes is left for you to take action so you have an idea of just where you stand and how urgent your situation is.

 

[cbg]

2018? The SOL has long since passed.

 

[justblue]

Illegal Termination, Due Process, and the US Constitution | Forum.FreeAdvice.com

Dean was advised down the street, deleted the thread and all the advice he was given and then started a new thread. He did this several times.

 

[army judge]

USPS Termination Policy (All You Need To Know)
October 3, 2023 by Marques Thomas


These employees are terminated if their medical condition renders them unable to perform the duties of the position and if they are ineligible for disability retirement.

Getting canned, being handed a pink slip, getting the axe— these are just a few nice ways of saying "you're fired." USPS calls any action that results in an employee losing their job a separation.

If you're a current USPS employee or thinking about applying for a job in the postal service, then you might be curious how USPS handles terminations. If so, keep reading this article to learn what I found out!


Can a USPS Supervisor Fire You?

As federal employees, USPS workers benefit from more job protection than those working in the private sector. Put another way, a USPS supervisor can't simply fire employees.

Postal workers cannot have their jobs taken away from them without due process. This process differs depending on the employment type (i.e. temporary or career).

Temporary employees may be fired at any time following a written notice of termination.

Career employees have even more protections and will go through a series of steps before being fired.

Career employees must do the following:

Be notified of the proposed termination and given an explanation as to why.

Be given a fair opportunity to see and study any evidence against them related to the proposed termination.

Be allowed a meaningful opportunity to respond to and refute the charges before any decision is made.

Have an appropriate legal procedure to appeal a decision.

What Is USPS Employee Misconduct?

USPS considers misconduct https://www.uspsoig.gov/content/what-misconduct as intentional or improper use of Postal Service resources. This includes the following:

Misuse of position or authority
Misuse of resources such as tools, vehicles, or office equipment
Destruction or theft of postal service property
Falsification of official documents
Theft of funds
Narcotics use or sale of drugs while on duty
Alcohol abuse on company property
Will USPS Rehire You After Getting Fired?
There doesn't seem to be a straightforward answer to this question. Rather, it seems like, in theory, USPS won't rehire ex-employees who were fired, but in practice, the issue is more nuanced.

To clarify, if you were fired for gross misconduct like stealing or destroying property, your chances of getting rehired are probably nil.

However, if you were fired for tardiness or poor attendance, there's a chance USPS will rehire you.

One main reason USPS may overlook an earlier termination is because the postal service is chronically understaffed. Basically, they need bodies and can't afford to turn too many applicants away.

Can USPS Employees Apply For Unemployment?
Unemployed former USPS employees receive benefits through the Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees Program (UCFE).

Although postal workers are federal employees, their unemployment benefits come from their state of residence.

In other words, UCFE is a state-run program. As such, unemployed post office workers should contact their state unemployment insurance agency to file a claim.

It stands to reason that your eligibility for unemployment compensation depends on your state's employment security law.

Still, every state requires that an applicant does the following:

Be unemployed or employed less than full–time as defined by the state employment security law and have earnings less than an amount specified in the state law.
Register for work and file an unemployment compensation claim at a local state employment security office.
Have worked a specified amount of time or have earned a specified amount of wages (or both) within a certain period.
Have the ability to work.
Be regularly available for work.
Be actively seeking work.
Report periodically to the local state employment security office.
On the other side of the coin, disqualification provisions vary from state to state. In most states, employment security laws lay out a period of total disqualification or a period of temporary disqualification for certain types of separations.

Former USPS employees are not disqualified from unemployment benefits if the separation was an involuntary termination of employment (other than misconduct) or if the separation was a voluntary termination or resignation based on good cause.

However, postal service employees will be disqualified for the following reasons:

They were discharged for misconduct.
They voluntarily quit without good cause.
They refused a suitable job without good cause.
To learn more, you can also see our posts on USPS sick leave policy, USPS inclement weather policy, and USPS background check policy.

There are several reasons why USPS may fire employees, but let's take a closer look at some of the most common reasons:

most common reasons for terminations:

365.3 Separations - Involuntary
365.31 Removal
365.311 Definition
Removal is an action involuntarily separating an employee, other than an employee serving under a temporary appointment or a career employee who has not completed the applicable probationary period, for cause.

365.312 Effective Date
The effective date is the date designated by the official making the decision, but is not before the expiration of the required time limit for the notice period.

365.32 Separation–Disqualification
365.321 Applicability
This type of separation applies only to employees who have not completed their probationary period.

365.322 Reasons for Action
Separation–disqualification is an action that results from the failure to meet conditions specified at the time of appointment (such as failure to qualify by conduct or capacity during the probationary period). It may also result from information that, if known at the time of appointment, would have disqualified the employee for the appointment.

365.323 Probationary Period
Separation–disqualification must be effected during the probationary period. Action is initiated at any time in the probationary period when it becomes apparent that the employee lacks capacity for efficient service.

365.324 Who Initiates Action
Supervisors may recommend separation–disqualification, but such recommendations must be referred for decision to the official having authority to take the action.

365.325 Procedure in Separating
If an appointing official decides to terminate an employee who is serving a probationary period due to conditions arising prior to appointment, or because work performance or conduct during this period fails to demonstrate qualification for continued postal employment, the employee's services are terminated by notifying the employee in writing as to why he or she is being terminated and the effective date of the action. The written notice of termination must at a minimum consist of the appointing official's conclusions about the inadequacies of performance or conduct.

365.326 Effective Date
The effective date of separation must be before the end of the probationary period and must not be retroactive.

365.33 Termination or Separation of Non-Career Employees
An employee serving under a temporary appointment may be separated at any time after notice in writing. In determining the proper action for a particular case, the following criteria are used:

Termination, expiration of appointment, is the term used to separate an employee who has reached the end of his or her term or whose services are no longer required.
Separation is the term used when describing the discontinuance of the service of a non-career employee because of unsatisfactory performance that warrants termination from the Postal Service.

365.34 Separation–Disability
365.341 Definition
Separation-disability is a term used to indicate the separation of an employee other than a non-career or a probationary employee whose medical condition renders the employee unable to perform the duties of the position and who is ineligible for disability retirement.

365.342 Applicability
At the expiration of 1 year of continuous absence without pay, an employee who has been absent because of illness may be separated for disability. This action is not mandatory, however, and if there is reason to believe the employee will recover within a reasonable length of time beyond the 1–year period, the employee may be granted additional leave in 30–day periods, not to exceed 90 days. If the employee's condition indicates that LWOP beyond that period is necessary incident to full recovery, the postal official must submit a comprehensive report to the area manager of Human Resources with appropriate recommendation and retain the employee on the rolls pending a decision.

An employee covered under USERRA who is hospitalized or convalescing due to a service-connected disability is required to return to work once recovered. The recovery period may not exceed 2 years (see EL-312 773(d)). Before any employee covered under USERRA can be separated for disability, the requesting postal official must submit a comprehensive report through the proper channels to the manager of Human Resources (Area), with appropriate recommendations. The employee must be retained on the rolls of the Postal Service pending a decision.

If an employee on the rolls of the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP) is unable to return to work at the end of the initial 1–year period of LWOP, the LWOP may be extended for successive additional periods of up to 6 months each. Extensions are granted only if it appears likely that the employee will be able to return to work within the period of the extension. If it does not appear likely that the employee will be able to return to work during the period, the employee, upon approval of the area manager of Human Resources (Area), is separated subject to reemployment rights.

Before any employee on the rolls of the OWCP can be separated, the requesting postal official must submit a comprehensive report through channels to the manager of Human Resources (Area), with appropriate recommendations. The employee must be retained on the rolls of the Postal Service pending a decision.
If the manager of Human Resources (Area) approves the request, and if the employee has sufficient service for entitlement to retirement, the employee is not separated until given an opportunity to retire. For involuntary separation, the notice and appeal procedures outlined in 650 or the applicable collective bargaining agreement, whichever is appropriate, is followed.

An employee who is eligible for disability retirement but chooses not to apply is not separated for disability until a complete medical report has been received and the employee has received retirement counseling.
An employee who is eligible for disability retirement is not separated for mental disability. Rather, the appointing official files an application for disability retirement on the employee's behalf provided the requirements are met (see 568 and 588).
365.343 Notice to Employee
No employees who have completed their probationary period are separated for disability until given a notice in writing of the proposed action and an opportunity to reply in accordance with appropriate adverse action procedures. Employees eligible for disability retirement are advised and notified that unless they file application for disability retirement within 1 year of separation their rights will lapse.

365.344 Effective Date
Separation–disability is effective on the date determined by the Human Resources official or on the date authoritative notice is received in the case of legal incompetence. If unused sick leave remains to the employee's credit, the effective date may be extended to permit payment for the unused sick leave. If an annuity is involved, an employee may wish to evaluate an earlier annuity payment against the unused sick leave. Separations for disability may not be effected retroactively or before the date of expiration of the time specified in the notice.

365.35 Separation, Reduction in Force
The Postal Service procedure for effecting reductions in force parallels the OPM procedure. The Postal Service attempts to make personnel adjustments by various administrative actions other than RIF. If these actions are not adequate, however, and RIF appears to be appropriate, prior approval for such action must be obtained, through channels of communication, from the vice president of Employee Resource Management.

USPS Termination Policy (All You Need To Know)

 

[adjusterjack]

Seems that his supervisor didn't fire him on the spot. In his post down the street (see link posted above) he refers to a "deciding official" who "sustained a proposal to terminate," implying that there was some sort of official procedure involved.

He later refers to "the 650" where he intended to raise his defense. Could that refer to CFE Part 650 - Standard for Appeals Promptness - Unemployment Compensation?

Federal Register :: Request Access

In his first post on this site he paints himself as a victim while providing no information about what happened after the altercation with his "acquaintance."

 

[army judge]

Seems that his supervisor didn't fire him on the spot. In his post down the street (see link posted above) he refers to a "deciding official" who "sustained a proposal to terminate," implying that there was some sort of official procedure involved.

He later refers to "the 650" where he intended to raise his defense. Could that refer to CFE Part 650 - Standard for Appeals Promptness - Unemployment Compensation?

 

[adjusterjack]

Tom Cruise - "I want the truth."
Jack Nicholson - "You can't handle the truth."

From "A Few Good Men"

 

[Tax Counsel]

2018? The SOL has long since passed.

If it was an illegal discrimination matter, you'd be right. But despite the OP mentioning "EEO Court" I see nothing in the facts that suggests illegal discrimination was the reason for termination. The agency said that the termination was for misconduct/violence. That's a valid reason for a federal agency to fire an employee, assuming that the employer has a sufficient basis for it and that the employer granted the employee his/her due process rights. Notably, the statute of limitations to sue over a wrongful discharge claim when the discharge was based on something other than illegal discrimination is significantly longer. Even if the SOL is still open, misconduct/workplace violence terminations are pretty difficult to challenge. The SOL to sue the federal government for most claims is generally 5 or 6 years, with a notable exception of illegal discrimination claims. Depending on the exact timeline of events and which SOL applies, there might be some time left to sue. If there is, it won't be much time and hence the former employee here needs to consult an employment law attorney familiar with federal government wrongful discharge claims ASAP to pursue the matter if there is any time remaining to do so.

 

[dean powell]

Aside from that I don't see any issue about her firing you, even though you were the "victim."

Did your supervisor fail to comply with termination guidelines?

No I did not recieve Due Process. She believed , in error, that she was required to fire me.

 

[dean powell]

Ok, what federal agency did you work for? What was the date of termination and what administrative appeals did you take with your agency and OPM? What exactly is the EEO court you mentioned? And when did it dismiss your claim?

I used to be a federal employee and at the end of my federal government career, a management official. The first thing that strikes me as confusing is you mention EEO but your brief description of the event leading to your termination doesn't mention any claim of illegal discrimination by the agency. The second thing I notice is that you said that were fired for misconduct/violence as the result of an acquaintance showing up at work and causing "havoc". The details of that would be significant, but it's far easier for a federal agency to terminate you for violence or misconduct than it is for poor performance. If the incident involved some kind of physical altercation with the acquaintance, even if you didn't strike back, as you say, that is often going to be good enough to fire you.



Depending on the details of the incident as she understood them, she might not be far off in that belief. She has a responsibility to ensure the safety of the workplace and employees she supervises and if a scuffle or fight breaks out, she cannot just ignore that.

The most glaring legal problem I see is that the date of your termination was 2018 or earlier. That raises potential statute of limitation issues if you wish to sue in court over this.

Keep looking for a lawyer familiar with wrongful termination actions by federal government agencies. If a lawyer won't take the case, ask the lawyer why he or she won't take it and ask the lawyer how much time the lawyer believes is left for you to take action so you have an idea of just where you stand and how urgent your situation is.

I worked for the Postal Service. About the details, my supervisor never spoke to me to get my description of the incident. Did not consider mitigating factors. Disregarded eye witness accounts in my favor. Lied about the polices statements as to why they could do no police report. I got a favorable ruling in a appeal hearing but in was rejecred for bogus reasons. See the hearing officers ruling below. This ruling was rejected because the Hearing officier did not discredit Raymonds testimony. Now you tell me.

I find Deciding Official Raymond and Proposing Official Laerdet to be credible when they each testified to their understanding that zero tolerance means zero tolerance. This view of zero tolerance as requiring removal has been rejected for many years by the MSPB, the Federal Circuit, and the ELM 650 Appeal Process, and is fatal to the Postal Service's case here.

Accordingly, I find that the Letter of Decision cannot withstand scrutiny, and will recommend below the relief requested by Appellant's Representative.

 

[cbg]

Then you'd better get yourself a lawyer fast because if the SOL has not already tolled, according to Tax's information above you are perilously close to it.

However, this is not a referral site. You cannot get an attorney by posting here. You can contact your State Bar Association, your local Legal Aide, or any law schools in your area for referrals. But you cannot get a lawyer by posting here.

 

[dean powell]

2018? The SOL has long since passed.

I could do nothing as far as I knew while I had a pending EEO case that was not dismissed until 2023.

 

[cbg]

And now it's 2024.

In any case, there is nothing a message board can do to help you.

 

[dean powell]

If it was an illegal discrimination matter, you'd be right. But despite the OP mentioning "EEO Court" I see nothing in the facts that suggests illegal discrimination was the reason for termination. The agency said that the termination was for misconduct/violence. That's a valid reason for a federal agency to fire an employee, assuming that the employer has a sufficient basis for it and that the employer granted the employee his/her due process rights. Notably, the statute of limitations to sue over a wrongful discharge claim when the discharge was based on something other than illegal discrimination is significantly longer. Even if the SOL is still open, misconduct/workplace violence terminations are pretty difficult to challenge. The SOL to sue the federal government for most claims is generally 5 or 6 years, with a notable exception of illegal discrimination claims. Depending on the exact timeline of events and which SOL applies, there might be some time left to sue. If there is, it won't be much time and hence the former employee here needs to consult an employment law attorney familiar with federal government wrongful discharge claims ASAP to pursue the matter if there is any time remaining to do so.

Thank you for your response. I am trying everyday to find an attorney. Your one of the few to say something positive. one guy on here followed my from another site. I think he's trying to get me band. I think he may work for the Postal Service .

 

[cbg]

Dean, FYI, no one "followed" you here. There are several of us who regularly post on both boards. We were here long before you were, and we will be here long after you've gone. None of us work for the postal service, and we have no personal interest in your situation.

 

[dean powell]

Then you'd better get yourself a lawyer fast because if the SOL has not already tolled, according to Tax's information above you are perilously close to it.

However, this is not a referral site. You cannot get an attorney by posting here. You can contact your State Bar Association, your local Legal Aide, or any law schools in your area for referrals. But you cannot get a lawyer by posting here.

Oh I was hoping an attorney might here of my case and contact me or something I know I'm running out of time.

 

[cbg]

Reputable attorneys do not troll message boards looking for clients.

 

[dean powell]

Tom Cruise - "I want the truth."
Jack Nicholson - "You can't handle the truth."

From "A Few Good Men"

You may be correct in that I cannot handle the truth. The truth is I got screwed over, didn't recieve my Due Process, and am not being allowed to fight my case because I dont have money