|
1
|
|
|
2
|
- U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC)
- ●
- Prohibited Personnel Practices
- ●
- Whistleblower Protection
|
|
3
|
- Authorized to —
- Investigate prohibited personnel practices and other activities
prohibited by civil service law, rule, or regulation
- Seek corrective action for victims of prohibited personnel practices
- Seek disciplinary action against officials who commit prohibited
personnel practices
|
|
4
|
- Authorized to —
- Provide safe channel for whistleblower disclosures
- Advise & enforce Hatch Act provisions on political activity by
federal, state, and local government employees
- Protect reemployment rights of federal employee military veterans and
reservists under USERRA
|
|
5
|
|
|
6
|
- Agency heads, and officials with delegated personnel management
authority, are responsible for —
- Preventing prohibited personnel practices
- Following and enforcing civil service laws, rules, and regulations
- Ensuring that employees are informed of rights and remedies (in
consultation with OSC)
|
|
7
|
- Merit System Principles
- The framework and foundation for making all personnel decisions in the
civil service
- Prohibited Personnel Practices
- Admonitions against specific practices that conflict with merit systems
principles
- Whistleblower Disclosures
- Osc provides a safe channel for disclosures by current and former
federal employees and applicants for federal employment
|
|
8
|
- 12 Prohibited Personnel Practices —four general categories:
- Hiring practices that offend merit system
- Retaliation for protected activity (including whistleblowing)
- Catch-all: violation of law, rule or regulation that implement merit
systems principles (including constitutional rights)
|
|
9
|
- Prohibited Personnel Practice to discriminate:
- Based on race, color, nationality, religion, gender, handicapping
condition, age, marital status, or political affiliation
- Based on “conduct which does not adversely affect the performance of
the employee or applicant, or the performance of others,” including
sexual orientation
- 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(1) and (b)(10)
|
|
10
|
- Prohibited Personnel Practice to:
- Coerce political activity of any person (including providing any
political contribution or service)
- Reprising against an employee or applicant for employment for the
refusal of any person to engage in political activity
- 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(3)
|
|
11
|
- Obstructing the right to compete
- Influencing withdrawal from competition
- Considering improper job references
- Knowingly violating veterans’ preference
- 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(2); (b)(4); (b)(5); (b)(6);(b)(7); (b)(11)
|
|
12
|
- Most common violations:
- Deceiving/willfully obstructing right to compete for employment — 5
U.S.C. § 2302(b)(4)
- Influencing withdrawal from competition to improve or injure employment
prospects of another — 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(5)
- Granting unauthorized preference or advantage to improve or injure the
prospects of any particular person for employment —
- 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(6)
|
|
13
|
|
|
14
|
- Caveats:
- While most hiring offenses require intent to deceive or manipulate,
hiring in violation of a law, rule, or regulation implementing a merit
system principle is also a PPP
- Negligent or imprudent actions can create appearance of violation
leading to complaints and investigations — E.g., Broadcasting one’s
choice before competition
|
|
15
|
- Manager deliberately fails to post vacancy to stop particular candidate
from applying
- Application received is deliberately misplaced or destroyed
- Supervisor gives employee dishonest recommendation or appraisal to keep
valuable employee or to help another candidate
|
|
16
|
- Supervisor encourages subordinate not to compete, or to withdraw
application, by promising future benefits that supervisor does not
intend to grant
- Closed vacancy announcement is re-opened to permit favored candidate to
apply
|
|
17
|
- Job qualifications are manipulated to favor particular applicant
- Supervisor tells qualified employee not to apply for job in order to
improve another employee’s chances of selection
|
|
18
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
21
|
- Disclosure Categories
- Violation of any law, rule, or regulation
- Gross mismanagement: substantial risk of significant impact on mission
- Gross waste of funds: more than debatable expenditure
- Abuse of authority
- Substantial & specific danger to public health & safety
|
|
22
|
- Generally protected when made to any person (except the wrongdoer)
- Need not be accurate to be protected
- Protected if employee reasonably believes that it is true — test is
both objective and subjective
|
|
23
|
- No requirement to go through chain of command
- Whistleblower’s personal motivation does not negate reasonable belief
- Employee or applicant protected if employer mistakenly believes he or
she is a whistleblower
|
|
24
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
26
|
- Any factor which alone or in connection with others tends to affect in
any way the outcome of the personnel action at issue
- Can be established by knowledge / timing alone
- Often established by circumstantial evidence
|
|
27
|
- Agency must show — by clear and convincing evidence — that it would have
taken same action without disclosure
- Factors:
- Strength of evidence in support of personnel action
- Existence & strength of motive to retaliate
- Treatment of similar employees who are not whistleblowers
|
|
28
|
- Be measured in your speech and actions
- Keep the merit systems concepts on your radar screen
- Seek expert advice when you are unsure
- Deal with problems as they occur to avoid the appearance of bad motive
- Be consistent in managing your employees
- Do your best not to be someone about whom the whistle is blown
|
|
29
|
|
|
30
|
- Corrective Action includes:
- Placing individual in the position he or she would have been in had no
wrongdoing occurred
- e.g., rescind suspension; job restoration
- Reasonable and foreseeable consequential damages
- Attorney fees, back pay and benefits, medical costs, travel expenses
|
|
31
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
36
|
- The Office of Special Counsel provides a safe channel for
whistleblower disclosures by federal employees, former federal
employees, and applicants for federal employment
|
|
37
|
- Jurisdictional elements
- Covered agency
- Most executive branch agencies
- Covered position
- Disclosure must invovle occurrence connected to performance of
employee’s duties & responsibilities
|
|
38
|
- OSC has no investigative authority
- OSC shall make substantial likelihood determination 15 days after
receiving information from whistleblower
- Substantial likelihood: agency investigation more likely than not to
substantiate allegations
- Follows MSPB definitions of gross waste of funds, gross mismanagement,
& abuse of authority
|
|
39
|
- Referrals--
- If Special Counsel determines there is substantial likelihood that
information shows one or more categories of wrongdoing, Special
Counsel must transmit information to agency head
|
|
40
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
42
|
- Agency’s report and any whistleblower comments are transmitted to
President and congressional oversight committees with jurisdiction over
the agency involved
- 5 U.S.C. § 1213 (e)(3)
|
|
43
|
- If Special Counsel determines that there is no substantial likelihood
that the information shows one of the categories of wrongdoing, then
Special Counsel informs whistleblower
- Reasons why disclosure may not be further acted on, and
- Directs individual to other offices available for receiving
disclsosures—5 U.S.C. § 1213 (g)(3)
|
|
44
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
46
|
|