Call : 888-899-7284
An MSPB administrative judge reversed a removal where the agency alleged possession of marijuana on government property—but the evidence showed the marijuana belonged to the employee’s spouse. Here’s what federal employees can learn about proof, assumptions, and protecting your career when discipline hits.
A Federal Circuit decision shows how “falsification” charges can fail when an agency can’t prove a statement was actually false—or when good-faith credibility findings are improperly overturned.
A federal employee was removed for medical inability to work around dust and solvents—but the MSPB found the agency could have reasonably accommodated the restrictions in a uniquely clean work environment and reversed the removal.
A Federal Circuit decision reversed a DOJ removal that hinged on an alleged “falsification” on an SF 86. The court emphasized that assumptions and conclusions are not enough—intent must be proven.
An MSPB decision explains why agencies may need to prove intent—especially when a charge is effectively about falsification. Here’s what federal employees can learn when discipline threatens a career.
An MSPB decision reversed a removal based on bipolar disorder, emphasizing evidence that medication controlled symptoms and that the employee could perform the job. The case highlights how medical evidence and treatment compliance can shape “inability to perform” and disability-discrimination defenses.
A DOJ criminal investigator’s removal was reversed when the MSPB found a due process violation: the deciding official relied on undisclosed Giglio issues as an aggravating factor. Here’s what that means for federal employees facing high stakes discipline.
A published MSPB decision shows how a removal can be mitigated when some charges fall away—even while a serious falsification charge remains sustained. The case highlights how evidence, standards, and Douglas factors shape outcomes.
An MSPB decision involving a federal employee’s timekeeping discrepancies shows how Douglas factors, de minimis variances, and disparate penalties can drive significant penalty mitigation.
In this MSPB decision, the Board upheld a finding that a USPS supervisor intentionally falsified an employment application—but ruled that removal was too severe. The penalty was mitigated to a written reprimand, with back pay and benefits ordered.