The case is one of many involving the firing en masse of probationers that has resulted in what Judge Contreras called “whiplash” for affected persons as those cases have yielded conflicting orders from various trial courts and higher courts. Image: Mark Van Scyoc/Shutterstock.com
In a ruling that could send a signal for other similar cases, a federal court has denied a request by a group of probationary federal employees who were fired earlier this year to overturn those actions and order them reinstated while the case proceeds.
District Judge Rudolph Contreras of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that they have not shown that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the firings constituted prohibited personnel practices; that they were defamed by being labeled as poor performers in their boilerplate dismissal notices even though their agencies had made no such findings; and that their agencies violated regulations on conducting reductions in force.
The case is one of many involving the firing en masse of probationers that has resulted in what Judge Contreras called “whiplash” for affected persons as those cases have yielded conflicting orders from various trial courts and higher courts.
In the weeks following the layoffs of probationers the MSPB experienced a surge of appeals, although the number has since subsided. While MSPB hearing officers can decide such cases, the MSPB governing board currently lacks a quorum and is unable to issue rulings on appeals of those decisions.
In such situations, the hearing officer’s decision can be deemed final and individuals have the right to appeal to federal appeals court, but Judge Contreras’s ruling signals that their prospects for success would not be good. He held that any such challenge should be limited to the MSPB process, noting that the cases in which courts had granted stays did not involve appeals by individuals but rather by other parties—a group of state governments, in one, and nonprofit groups and the AFGE union, in the other.
A number of complaints have been filed at the Office of Special Counsel similarly asserting that agency actions constituted prohibited personnel practices. However, the OSC has signaled that it will not pursue such cases by dropping two that it had brought under now-fired Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger.
The temporary stays that the MSPB had granted at his request—one essentially a test case of a sampling of six employees from various agencies and one involving all probationers fired by the Agriculture Department—have since expired.
Shutdown Meter Ticking Up a Bit
Judge Backs Suit against Firings of Probationers, but Won’t Order Reinstatements
Focus Turns to Senate on Effort to Block Trump Order against Unions
TSP Adds Detail to Upcoming Roth Conversion Feature
White House to Issue Rules on RIF, Disciplinary Policy Changes
Hill Dems Question OPM on PSHB Program After IG Slams Readiness
See also,
How Do Age and Years of Service Impact My Federal Retirement
The Best Ages for Federal Employees to Retire