MSPB has issued a guide–in the form of a series of short articles–addressing various aspects of discipline in the federal workplace, ranging from the law to its own role to obligations of management officials involved in taking adverse actions.
“It is our hope that this format will enable readers to locate and easily review relevant information, particularly as Congress prepares to consider laws intended to affect specific elements of the civil service system. The report also describes how each element fits into the larger whole,” MSPB chair Susan Tsui Grundmann wrote in the introductory message.
Besides being unusual among MSPB reports for its format–and its lack of recommendations–the report also is notable for the degree that the merit board defends itself against accusations that it is too lenient on misbehaving federal employees.
“There have been decisions that trigger outrage at the perceived errors of the Board,” it acknowledges, citing one widely publicized ruling in favor of an employee that it said was necessary because of the way the employing agency decided to bring charges. Contrary to how the ruling was perceived, it said, the merit board “has an extensive history of sustaining removals for egregious off-duty misconduct.”
Another section stresses the limits of MSPB’s authorities, saying that it “can do only what it has been authorized by law to do. This can result in some cases having outcomes that observers might conclude are undesirable. However, nothing in the statute instructs MSPB that it is empowered to create the most desirable outcome.
“Rather, MSPB must assemble established constitutional law, statutes, regulations, and case decisions and apply that body of law to the facts presented to it. The Board lacks the power to change the facts given to it (such as the charges and evidence) or the laws that it has been told to apply,” it says.
