Document, document, document provide credible evidence, let it speak for itself, Handling bad facts, applying them to Douglas Factors. If you want you can download and read the fullDouglas v. V.A. Factor 8: The notoriety of the offense or its impact upon the reputation of the agency. 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. consistency of the penalty with any applicable agency table of penalties; (8) the notoriety of the offense or its impact upon the . This factor lends itself most to employees arguing for leniency in their case. The Douglas Factors . Determine an experienced a table of penalties douglas factors and ends with childishness rather than intentional or reasons, agencies should not have successfully. Factor 1: 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. Moreover, I believe most, if not all, of the employees involved were removed or resigned from federal service. ^K[i>P+hvSbfpNK"ly(O$qUGI']}Oy"VF>arP,NHD'9Ets/'n[?e>?=}2~H8\pa^j[u})Uq,mE?}EUWY O\[!ehbL% Sy wmdbwE,\VEwZXjy-$DG>[xmb[9O+gwY.qGVP5r#0av#a.vv_cvqWrbeEnL)?:9!!49 @h=bk8;&j. Acknowledgement of Receipt: ______________________________ __________________ (Employee's Name) (Date) Sample: If employee fails or refuses to sign the acknowledgement: Sample: I certify that I handed this proposed action to (Employees Name) on (Date). A mitigating factor is one that suggests the discipline be mitigated, or lowered. EAP can be reached by calling 1-800-XXX-XXXX. When looking for an attorney make sure they have experience handling federal-sector employment cases. 3 Douglas v. Veterans Administration, 5 M.S.P.R. past performance). Managers should have a legitimate, non-discriminatory or "business" reason for taking a disciplinary action. 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. 9 Ward v. U.S. If you can make a strong enough case the Administrative Judge (AJ) may modify or cancel the discipline in your case. We have also seen federal agencies use this Douglas factor to aggravate disciplinary penalties where other agencies (federal, state, local) have become aware of a federal employees misconduct, arguing that the employees actions have caused the federal agencys reputation to somehow become tarnished. We need to specifically state why there is erosion of supervisory confidence. Managers must also consider the scope of the misconduct in the context of an employees position and job duties. If you wish to explore legal representation, please call our office or use this form to inquire about our consultation process. 502, 508 (1994) (holding that because 31 U.S.C. endobj 4 0 obj We are all human, we all make mistakes, how you handle those mistakes speaks volumes about your character. Yes___ No____This factor is one of the more technically difficult to apply. Other times, when there are medical issues related to the offense we can use this argument to attempt to mitigate the proposed penalty. While some federal agencies attempt to use this Douglas factor in an effort to attempt to increase a federal employees disciplinary penalty, we have found that this factor is extremely helpful for purposes of a reduction in the employees penalty. . Douglas Factors matters vary from case to case and federal employees should consult with an attorney. The Table provides for more serious penalties for . The Douglas factors are critical for federal employees facing a pending disciplinary action or for those at the MSPB on appeal. Explanation, if relevant: (7) Consistency of the penalty with any applicable agency table of penalties. In some instances, you may want to request that management reconsider your case. The Table of Penalties in the Departmental Manual (370 DM 752) provides a non-exhaustive list of types of misconduct for which the Agency can discipline employees. Cir. 280 (1981) These factors are used to explain why the penalty was chosen. Starr Wright USA is the nations leading provider of FEPLI. Can an employee take responsibility, correct their behavior and come back to the job? If that clerk is thencaught stealing from another employee or scalping a few dollars off of each days transactions, that would clearly call in to question his ability to perform as a clerkgoing forward. hb```f``2c`a`,c`@ r, ^Ma Such cases call into question an employees ability to perform their specific job duties with integrity. So, if your case was publicized or brought shame and negative attention to the agency you can expert a more severe penalty. 527, 8 (2003); Zayer v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 90 M.S.P.R. This is because it puts you on notice of the penalties which is factor #9, below. \|Y,y#}|\G|u|.;HWO)58rHY.+ry9$~]BJNwn;`L\RU=TDrwumX=XDjuh:bIvMQg:u?*:qKK~#q!?). 12.Provision of Information Relied Upon Paragraph: Generally, the material (evidence such as witness statements, policies, regulations and the like) should be referenced and attached to the proposal. Cir. 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. Why can such behavior not be tolerated? 1985). Specification #2. Those in positions of higher levels of trust and authority, such as supervisors, are held to a greater level of accountability than those in non-supervisory positions. Knowing what managers are looking for will aid your oral reply presentation, and could be what saves you your job with the federal government. Starr Wright USA is an insurance agency specializing in insurance solutions for federal employees and federal contractors. In cases of severe misconduct, it may be appropriate to conduct an independent investigation of the misconduct through the Office of Human Resources, a third-party contact investigator or the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). This Douglas factor is one of the most often used arguments our firm uses in support of mitigation of a disciplinary penalty. However, an employee with no prior disciplinary record, good prior performance and job dedication would probably have good potential for rehabilitation. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Tables of Penalties are guidelines that work in conjunction with the criteria supervisors use to determine appropriate penalties for misconduct, called the Douglas Factors.1 They do not specify mandatory discipline.2 Tables of Penalties also do not apply to contractors, and each agency has discretion as to which employees the Table will apply. The more notice you have of the prohibition on certain conduct the strongerargument management has for issuing discipline if you engage in that misconduct. What is effect of the misconduct charged? It is a widely accepted principle that the penalty must be appropriate to the offense and the minimum that will correct the behavior. If an employees misconduct generates publicity and negative attention to an agency or otherwise damages its reputation, expect a more severe penalty. Starr Wright USA a marketing name for Starr Wright Insurance Agency, Inc. and its affiliate(s). 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 . 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. 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. 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? Explanation, if relevant: (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. That is why its important to use these factors to analyze the facts of each individualcasewhere the rubber hits the road. 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. 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. Hiring an experienced federal employment law attorney for your oral reply can pay for itself many times over. 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. Your absence was not approved by your supervisor. The consistency of the penalty with any applicable agency table of penalties; 8. Management must issue a notice of the proposed adverse action, setting forth the charged misconduct and the specifications supporting the charge. Management has likely even required you to review the table and sign a form asserting your knowledge of it. This Douglas factor generally involves how much the public has been advised of a federal employees alleged misconduct. the relevant factors, in its decision letter, testimony, and other submissions can have a significant impact on the board's ruling. This factor is generally used for purposes of mitigation unless an employee has a past similar disciplinary action. Which is why Federal Employee Professional Liability Insurance is critical. For example, lets say you are arguing that there aremitigating factors present in your case (factor #11) because your child was hospitalized for a full month leading up to your misconduct. Your representative, if an agency employee, must contact his or her immediate supervisor to make advance arrangements for the use of official time. For example, one could argue that given the lack of prior discipline that a proposed removal should be mitigated to a suspension action. Cir. An employee with many years of exemplary service and numerous commendations may deserve to have his/her penalty mitigated. More significant discipline is referred to as an adverse action, which entails suspensions of more than 14 days, reductions in grade or pay, furloughs of 30 days or less, or removals.
table of penalties douglas factors