table of penalties douglas factors

In some instances this may mean pointing out points of analysis or facts to management if they are unaware. The more notorious the offense you commit the more severe the discipline you will face. endobj Relevant? If the person signed for receipt of the letter include that information. Sample 1: I have attached the material relied on to support this proposed removal. This factor looks to the status of the employee. 0 Generally, this argument is used by a federal employee to support a reduction in penalty based on their good record of service to their agency (e.g. Cir. Yes___ No____How well informed an employee was of the rule that was violated is a factor that may have to be considered in determining the penalty. Generally, the ranges of penalties are fairly broad (e.g., Letter of Reprimand to Proposed Removal). A good example of negative notoriety are the recent cases involving Secret Service Agents that hiredescorts in South America. Govexec.com . endstream endobj 50 0 obj <> endobj 51 0 obj <> endobj 52 0 obj <>stream Hiring an experienced federal employment law attorney for your oral reply can pay for itself many times over. This factor is generally used for purposes of mitigation unless an employee has a past similar disciplinary action. A big question managers have to ask themselves is: after the misconduct that has occurred can I confidently bring the employee back? Only relevant factors must be included. Cir. By contrast, the Douglas Factors are well known by managers becausethey have to reference and articulate how those factors interplay with the specifics of every disciplinarycase they preside over. Agency's table of penalties recognizes this severity in establishing ranges of penalties for Our DC-Metropolitan Based Law Firm Specializes in Employment, Security Clearance, and Retirement Law. An example of an aggravating factor would be an employee who has been previously discipline for the same misconduct two times within the last year. Points to issuance specifically, to warrant mitigation where, and explore all other commenters stated above that. This factor lends itself most to employees arguing for leniency in their case. [_S>,o)ZyfL_{*4^BOoss%U'jYM^>Ydw%>=z+l'?@_+S]6EO+<=_)^;/ycCwhiE[qsA[]~w_}xxwo~y3boK&rVkOk [6#e|:. The ranges of penalties shown in the Table are those that are considered to be most typical for offenses of the nature indicated. Generally, one of the most important areas in defending a federal employee in these types of cases involves arguing the application of the Douglas Factors in attempting to mitigate (or reduce) disciplinary penalties issued in a case. Yes___ No____This factor recognizes a relationship between the employee's position and the misconduct. Explanation, if relevant: (10) Potential for the employee's rehabilitation.Relevant? Explanation, if relevant: (12) The adequacy and effectiveness of alternative sanctions to deter such conduct in the future by the employee or others.Relevant? Postal Service, 634 F.3d 1274, 1282 (Fed. Your signature does not indicate agreement with this action; it only represents receipt of this notice on the date signed. <>/ExtGState<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageB/ImageC/ImageI] >>/Annots[ 15 0 R 16 0 R 17 0 R 18 0 R 19 0 R 20 0 R 21 0 R 22 0 R 23 0 R 24 0 R 25 0 R 26 0 R 27 0 R 28 0 R 34 0 R 35 0 R 36 0 R] /MediaBox[ 0 0 612 792] /Contents 4 0 R/Group<>/Tabs/S/StructParents 0>> NOTE: Penalty depends on such factors as provocation, extent of any injuries, and whether actions were defensive or offensive in nature. If you have been disciplined before you will face harsher discipline going forward. (See Attachment 1 -Your statement of (DATE) and Attachment 2- Statement of your immediate supervisor of (DATE)). For example, a law enforcement officer is charged with enforcing laws. This Douglas factor comes into play when the Agency picks and chooses different penalties for similar-level federal employees. Starr Wright USA is the nations leading provider of FEPLI. How does action taken promote the efficiency of the service? MSPB decision. Factor 7: "Consistency of the penalty with any applicable agency table of penalties" . Please designate your representative, if any, by name, address, position, and employer in a signed statement, and forward that statement to (Deciding Official's Name) at the above stated address, before the expiration of the reply period. When a federal employee faces discipline for misconduct, those determining the penalty must consider certain criteria known as the Douglas Factors. The Douglas Factors The Merit Systems Protection Board in its landmark decision, Douglas vs. Veterans Administration, 5 MSPR 280, established criteria that supervisors must consider in . Nor can it be doubted that the federal courts have regarded that authority as properly within the Commissions power. Douglas v. Veterans Administration, 5 M.S.P.R. 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. Heres what anyone who works for the federal government needs to know about the Douglas Factors. This Douglas factor generally refers to the connection between the seriousness of the allegation and the position that a federal employee holds. 51, 8 (2001). The Douglas Factors The Merit Systems Protection Board in its landmark decision, Douglas vs. Veterans Administration, 5 MSPR 280, established criteria that supervisors must consider in determining an appropriate . How do you handle these aggravating factors? An official website of the United States government. Postal Service v. Gregory, 534 U.S. 1, 5 (2001) (noting that the agency bears the burden of proving its charge by a preponderance of the evidence and that, [u]nder the Boards settled procedures, this requires proving not only that the misconduct actually occurred, but also that the penalty assessed was reasonable in relation to it); Lachance v. Devall, 178 F.3d 1246, 1256 (Fed. What every federal employee facing discipline should be familiar with: The Douglas Factors. A deciding official must consider specific factors in determining the reasonableness of the penalty. % However, a thorough investigation and evaluation may lead to a determination that the misconduct was not substantially similar. Only those Douglas Factors relevant to each case need be considered. The first time an employee is unless application of the Douglas factors supports a penalty outside that range or if a statutory penalty applies such as willful misuse of a Government vehicle. Lets say you missed a deadline for an important assignment and management has proposed removal. Your absence was not approved by your supervisor. Relevant? Relevant? Relevant? When our firm prepares an appeal to the MSPB for a client or in a case before a deciding official at the proposal stage it is important to set forth any and all mitigating factors that might be applicable to a federal employees case. If a mitigation argument does not fit under the other 11 Douglas factors, it can, in most instances, be argued here. For example, an allegation of dishonesty would be treated . In the case of Douglas vs. Veterans Administration, 5 MSPR 280 (1981), the . Most importantly, employees need to be aware that once they have a disciplinary record, it makes defending new discipline cases much more difficult. Consistency of the penalty with any applicable agency table of penalties; 8. 1985). Managers must apply penalties that are similar to those imposed in like cases. Factor 9: The clarity with which the employee was on notice of any rules that were violated in committing the offense, or had been warned about the conduct in question. Note: The above misconduct could be the basis for two separate charges, Unauthorized Absence and Failure to Call in an Absence as Required by Agency Policy. Cir. past performance). What if I already had anoral reply and theyve issued a decision and misapplied the Douglas Factors? With policies that cover up to $2,000,000 in liability coverage and up to $400,000 in administrative defense coverage, and a team of former Assistant US Attorneys and Federal Employees, Starr Wright USA will be your trusted advocate throughout the entire process. Explanation, if relevant: (2) The employee's job level and type of employment, including supervisory or fiduciary role, contacts with the public, and prominence of the position. 3 0 obj %PDF-1.5 % After reading this guide, if you want to read further on the topic of federal employee discipline, you mayfind our guide toMSPB and discipline cases helpful. The national media picked the story up, and it was very detrimental to the agency. %PDF-1.5 Your job as an employee is to support your position as best as you possibly can. Yes___ No____This factor is one of the more technically difficult to apply. 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? The nature and seriousness of the offense, and its relation to the employees duties, position, and responsibilities, including whether the offense was intentional or technical or inadvertent, or was committed maliciously or for gain, or was frequently repeated; the employees job level and type of employment, including supervisory or fiduciary role, contacts with the public, and prominence of the position; the employees past work record, including length of service, performance on the job, ability to get along with fellow workers, and dependability; the effect of the offense upon the employees ability to perform at a satisfactory level and its effect upon supervisors confidence in the employees work ability to perform assigned duties; consistency of the penalty with those imposed upon other employees for the same or similar offenses; consistency of the penalty with any applicable agency table of penalties; the notoriety of the offense or its impact upon the reputation of the agency; the clarity with which the employee was on notice of any rules that were violated in committing the offense, or had been warned about the conduct in question; the potential for the employees rehabilitation; mitigating circumstances surrounding the offense such as unusual job tensions, personality problems, mental impairment, harassment, or bad faith, malice or provocation on the part of others involved in the matter; and. Factor 12: The adequacy and effectiveness of alternative sanctions to deter such conduct in the future by the employee or others. For instance, did the employee have access to the table of penalties? If the action is less than a removal, add: Further misconduct on your part may result in disciplinary action up to and including removal from your position and from Federal service. For instance, a law enforcement officer who is convicted of breaking laws may result in harsher penalties than, say, an employee who accidentally nods off while on a night shift. Contact your employee relations advisor to get the information to fill in the blanks. In every discipline case there are going to be facts that likely hit on a specific Douglas Factor and really cut against the employee. Once you have a few key factors you should try to collect any supporting evidence that may be helpful, like doctors notes, proof of counseling sessions, etc. generadores de diesel precios generadores de diesel precios Home Realizacje i porady Bez kategorii generadores de diesel precios Note. endobj See U.S. Sometimes management may misapply factors, or misconstrue them. What if I do not agree with managements analysisof a specific Douglas Factor? Obtain insurance protection for your career today. Factor: Nature and seriousness 9. The first Douglas factor, nature and seriousness of the offense, generally refers to the connection between the seriousness of the allegation and the position that an individual federal employee holds. There are certain standards of behavior and conduct expected of employees by our external and internal customers. accruing multiple instances of discipline can lead you on the fast track to removal from federal service. Conversely, aggravating factors are those that suggest the discipline be sustained or even increased. 527, 8 (2003); Zayer v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 90 M.S.P.R. Explanation, if relevant: 9.Employee Assistance Program Paragraph: All Federal Agencies have EAP programs. If the proposal in your case is grossly above the range suggested in the table it is imperative that you point this to management. 9 Ward v. U.S. On the surface, many incidents of misconduct may seem to be similar. Management must issue a notice of the proposed adverse action, setting forth the charged misconduct and the specifications supporting the charge. Explanation, if relevant: (4) The employee's past work record, including length of service, performance on the job, ability to get along with fellow workers, and dependability.Relevant? 1349(b) requires a suspension of not less than one month for the use of a Government vehicle for other than an official purpose, and the appellants actions were closely analogous, it would be inappropriate for the Board to scrutinize whether the agencys penalty of a 30-day suspension was warranted). -Guide to discrimination law and the EEOC, -Federalemployee's guide discipline cases and the MSPB, -What every federal employee should know - The Douglas Factors. An example of a mitigating factor would be having no prior discipline in a 20 year federal career when applying Douglas Factors #3 and #4. The Douglas factors are: (1) The nature and seriousness of the offense, and its relation to the employee's duties, position, and responsibilities, including whether the offense was intentional or technical or inadvertent, or was committed maliciously or for gain, or was frequently repeated; 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. Any replies submitted will be given full consideration. Has an employee been on the job for a long time? For instance, if a mental health issue or addiction caused problems on the job but the employee has since sought out effective treatment that may be an acceptable alternative. Loss of supervisory confidence as a Douglas factor is typically used by Federal agencies in serious disciplinary / adverse actions to issue a more serious disciplinary penalty. This material will be made available for review to you and/or your designated representative by contacting the (NAME & PHONE of POC) to arrange a mutually convenient time. This Quick Start Guide covers the following Key Points: 1. hbbd``b`:$ Hd V$D? The factors may mitigate or aggravate (1) The nature and seriousness of the offense, and its relation to the employee's duties, position, and responsibilities, including whether the offense was intentional or technical or inadvertent, or was committed maliciously or for gain, or was frequently repeated.Relevant? 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. 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. Reviewing thesetwelve factors in a vacuum is not useful to you as an employee, or tomanagers who are trying to make a decision about a specific disciplinarycase. hmo0 U6S!)Mh~wP`B|)ZAp!= xCKno:Phj-bXJbAw,,M]KO2]fka8c iGusuOIt XG.2o*XYa&5'0>lw,Utr;(}s]6rqGp_g5>G7eucOL_>& Other times, when there are medical issues related to the offense we can use this argument to attempt to mitigate the proposed penalty. rDA(dCpY0!G8#rDA(9un\##HH_|?;y.?yA>1i|e,Q}ptWS8?/Gz Your unauthorized absence required other employees to be responsible for accomplishing your work on the days you were absence. Yes___ No____In order to use prior discipline as a basis to enhance a current penalty, three criteria must be met. This one is pretty self-explanatory. Discipline can range from letters of reprimand to short suspensions. It reduces maximum penalties for offenses like murders and other homicides; armed armed home invasion burglaries; armed armed carjackings, as I mentioned; armed robberies; unlawful gun . If an offense results in a loss of trust or an employee isnt willing to be accountable for their actions, managers may not be willing to take the chance. If you were going through a divorce, your child was hospitalized, or a family member had passed away, you should be explaining these mitigating factors to management. Ability to perform, and supervisory confidence, Consistency of the penalty with other cases, Consistency of the penalty with agencys table of penalties and offenses, Adequacy and effectiveness of alternative sanctions, Applying the Douglas Factorsto your case. In these circumstances, appropriate analysis of this factor may result in considering 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. For more information, visit WrightUSA.com. affidavits, performance ratings, SF-50s, letters of commendation) for the record. 64 0 obj <>/Filter/FlateDecode/ID[<3B0C3180ECE15C735B3288C81A6A54AE><030475FC020CB04DB606BDDC5C48A5E3>]/Index[49 24]/Info 48 0 R/Length 81/Prev 157377/Root 50 0 R/Size 73/Type/XRef/W[1 2 1]>>stream ______________________________ __________________ (Name) (Date) Sample: If employee cannot be reached personally at the time of the proposal: I certify that I sent this proposed action to (Employees Name and address) on (Date) by both certified and express mail.

Larry Mcenerney Obama Speech, Mason Mount And Saka Who Is The Best, Articles T