The Merit Systems Protection Board recently split over whether the U.S. Postal Service properly fired a postmaster described as “lax and not in control.”
USPS found the allegedly derelict postmaster botched her duties in failing to ensure timely mail delivery, mismanaging the post office’s finances, taking extensive breaks, inconsistently applying USPS policies affecting both the public and postal employees and in generally fostering a hostile and disorganized work environment.
After her attempt to improve her performance under a performance improvement plan failed to satisfy her supervisor, he removed her in part based on conversations he had with her coworkers. An administrative judge sustained the removal.
On appeal to the MSPB, the postmaster claimed her due process rights were violated, asserting that her removing supervisor improperly relied on ex parte communications regarding dereliction of duty and allegations from her coworkers she did not have the opportunity to challenge before her removal.
In determining whether such a communication violates an individual’s due process rights, the courts determine whether the communication was so substantial that it caused prejudice, not merely a communication which confirms or clarifies information already before the removing official. One MSPB member found the supervisor merely used the communications to confirm evidence that the postmaster was deficient in her duties, the other, that her removing supervisor relied on significant information she did not have an opportunity to challenge.
Any appeal will be heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
The full text of the decision can be found online.
