table of penalties douglas factors table of penalties douglas factors

Why can such behavior not be tolerated? Let me give you an example. Bargaining unit employees may grieve an adverse action under the negotiated grievance procedure in a collective bargaining agreement rather than challenging it to the MSPB. There are certain standards of behavior and conduct expected of employees by our external and internal customers. Once an employee has a disciplinary record, its harder to defend against new charges of misconduct and more difficult to argue that a mitigated penalty is deserved. Did the employee have access to a handbook that detailed proper procedure and policy? Douglas Factors In Depth The Merit Systems Protection Board in its landmark decision, Douglas vs. Veterans Administration, 5 MSPR 280, established criteria that supervisors must consider in determining . Merit Systems Protection Board still follows today. For example, an allegation of dishonesty would be treated . xfg! On (DATE), your supervisor had to take time away from her duties to complete your (Specify) assigned project. This Douglas factor generally involves how much the public has been advised of a federal employees alleged misconduct. But do not highlight them either. Cir. Stewarding Conservation and Powering Our Future, Toggle Dyslexia-friendly black-on-creme color scheme. 2012) (internal citations and punctuation omitted). Starr Wright USA is a division of Starr Insurance Companies, which is a marketing name for the operating insurance and travel assistance companies and subsidiaries of Starr International Company, Inc. and for the investment business of C.V. Starr & Co., Inc. https://www.mspb.gov/studies/adverse_action_report/10_DeterminingthePenalty.htm, https://www.mspb.gov/mspbsearch/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=253434&version=253721&application=ACROBAT, https://www.ivancielaw.com/federal-employment-law/what-are-the-douglas-factors/, https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/employee-relations/reference-materials/douglas-factors.pdf. Sample: Specification #1. 72 0 obj <>stream This guide has beenprepared by an attorney with extensive experience practicing before the MSPB, both as a representative of federal agencies, and as a representative of federal employees. Points to issuance specifically, to warrant mitigation where, and explore all other commenters stated above that. If an employees misconduct generates publicity and negative attention to an agency or otherwise damages its reputation, expect a more severe penalty. Only those Douglas Factors relevant to each case need be considered. A federal agencys table of penalties is typically a table with lists of individual offenses and the ranges of possible penalties for such offenses. Regardless, try to avoid getting into an argument with management over factors. If you are low level employee with no supervisory functions this factor should have some mitigating value. This has often been considered one of the most important Douglas factors by the MSPB. 14.CC:s CCs always include the deciding official and may include a human resources office official and/or legal counsel in accordance with your Agencys practice.CC: PAGE PAGE 9 / 0 1 2 3 ? Table Of Penalties Douglas Factors The Douglas Factors should be considered in selecting a penalty. Management has likely even required you to review the table and sign a form asserting your knowledge of it. @$0$6dd{8Q$AUzw43X!_>=+mi!d+iy+bn%'P Tj[Q9BoVbHBUL8c X>S[ bT@ `-' , 8Z7K2 (,B(AfZ If this is impractical to do, use Sample 2. If you are a federal employee facing discipline, asyou read this articleyou should be thinking about the which of the twelve Douglas Factors are in your favor, and how you can present evidence to support your position on those factors. A good example of negative notoriety are the recent cases involving Secret Service Agents that hiredescorts in South America. This factor basically asks: Did you know, or should you have known, that what you did was wrong and that you would be punished for engaging in that kind ofconduct? If you are a federal manager reading this article, it will help you understand the kind of analysis you should be engaging inwhen you apply the 12 Douglas Factors to the specific facts of a discipline case. Many federal agencies maintain tables of penalties that detail discipline options for common offenses. At Berry & Berry, PLLC, our attorneys represent federal employees in various types of federal agency disciplinary and adverse actions. You should not list a factor unless it is relevant. When an employee with a high level of trust and authority violates regulations, they generally face harsher penalties. Go through each Douglas Factorand try to write down points that arein your favor and points that are not in your favor for each one. When these expectations are not met as a result of an employee's misconduct, the reputation of the Agency may be tarnished. The first factor looks at the severity of the misconduct and how itrelates to the position the employee has. affidavits, performance ratings, SF-50s, letters of commendation) for the record. The first Douglas Factor examines how the level of misconduct relates to an employees particular duties, as well as if the offense was committed intentionally. All other facts the same, you would want to point this inconsistency to managements attention because it is clear the two penalties are not consistent with each other. endobj Berry & Berry, PLLCrepresents federal employees in these types of federal employment matters and can be contacted at (703) 668-0070 or www.berrylegal.com to arrange for an initial consultation regarding Douglas factor and other federal employment issues. consistency of the penalty with any applicable agency table of penalties; (8) the notoriety of the offense or its impact upon the . For example, a law enforcement officer is charged with enforcing laws. This is a very fact specific factor and will depend on the managers opinion as much as the employees misconduct. While not used that often by federal agencies in their final decisions, this Douglas factor can and should be argued in significant disciplinary cases (e.g., proposed removals or significant suspension cases). Postal Service, 634 F.3d 1274, 1282 (Fed. 2011); Stone v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 179 F.3d 1368, 1376 (Fed. The Douglas Factors get their name from a 1981 MSPB decision holding that the MSPB would review an agency's penalty selection by applying factors that since have become known by the last name of the appellant, whose removal was upheld after the factors were applied. This Douglas factor can be extremely helpful for purposes of mitigation where a federal employee has continued to work successfully in their normal position (i.e., not placed in light duty or administrative leave), over an extended period of time, after the underlying allegation has occurred. That translates into harsher penalties for repeat offenders. rDA(dCpY0!G8#rDA(9un\##HH_|?;y.?yA>1i|e,Q}ptWS8?/Gz 4 0 obj It is often the case that a federal employee has been charged with a violation of agency rules but has not been properly trained with respect to these rules or regulations. Agency's table of penalties recognizes this severity in establishing ranges of penalties for Leverage the Douglas Factors properly at your Oral Reply, and you may avoid a costly MSPB Case Later. Obtain insurance protection for your career today. Sample: Your unauthorized absence(s) violates (Name of Agency) policy (Identify by name, number and date) specifically Section (Number) at Page (Number) which states: (Extract the language of the policy). The Douglas Factors explained, the keys to a discipline case - Ivancie Law Sample: If you need assistance in dealing with any personal matters, the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) is available to provide confidential counseling services. 4.Charge: (Alleged misconduct - the reason the action is being proposed) Samples: Charge: Unauthorized Absence(Number of offense if applicable) or Charge: Unauthorized Absence Third Offense 5.Specification(s): The facts and evidence that establish the misconduct charged took place. 2278 0 obj <>stream The key is credibility. Your misconduct adversely affected not only the work you were assigned but required that your coworkers perform your duties as well taking time away from their assigned work. For example, if an employee has no past disciplinary record, factor #3 doesnt hurt the employee, and can actually become a mitigating factor. We are all human, we all make mistakes, how you handle those mistakes speaks volumes about your character. -Guide to discrimination law and the EEOC, -Federalemployee's guide discipline cases and the MSPB, -What every federal employee should know - The Douglas Factors. Producing a doctors note to management confirming the hospitalization supports the validity of your claim and will be harder for management to overlook than had you just made a verbal assertion of the same. When looking for an attorney make sure they have experience handling federal-sector employment cases. Generally, the ranges of penalties are fairly broad (e.g., Letter of Reprimand to Proposed Removal). endobj Factor 7: "Consistency of the penalty with any applicable agency table of penalties" . Reston, VA 20190. Misconduct and Discipline | U.S. Department of the Interior Douglas Factors in Federal Employment - InformedFED . The consistency of the penalty with any applicable agency table of penalties; 8. Relevant? The key inquiry here is whether like and similar cases have resulted in close-to-the-same discipline you are facing in your case. Breaking an obscure rule will be viewed less harshly than breaking one that is well publicized, and particularly one on which the employee was given specific notice. The Federal Starr is a publication by Starr Wright USA. By William N. Rudman . Explanation, if relevant: (3) The employee's past disciplinary record.Relevant? Hiring an experienced federal employment law attorney for your oral reply can pay for itself many times over. Generally, the ranges of penalties are fairly broad (e.g., Letter of Reprimand to Proposed Removal). The nature and seriousness of the offense, and its relationship to the employee's . Other times, when there are medical issues related to the offense we can use this argument to attempt to mitigate the proposed penalty. For instance, did the employee have access to the table of penalties? So, if they have been convicted of violating the law, say stealing, this factor will likely cut against them and lead to a more severe penalty. Non-disciplinary counseling, guidance memoranda, provision of Agency policy to the employee and requiring the reading and signing of certain rules are methods to communicate what are the requirements of conduct in the workplace. A big question managers have to ask themselves is: after the misconduct that has occurred can I confidently bring the employee back?