Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

VA (Department of Veterans Affairs)

The United States has the most comprehensive system of assistance for veterans of any nation in the world. This benefits system traces its roots back to 1636, when the Pilgrims of Plymouth Colony were at war with the Pequot Indians. The Pilgrims passed a law which stated that disabled soldiers would be supported by the colony. The establishment of the Veterans Administration came in 1930 when Congress authorized the President to "consolidate and coordinate Government activities affecting war veterans."

This forum also includes the Veterans Health Administration (VHA).

Perhaps you are working for the VA or interested in working for the VA. Here is a forum to share your experience with the VA.

2 Pages<12
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
King_Fed  
#21 Posted : Thursday, May 04, 2017 6:35:26 PM(UTC)
King_Fed

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/26/2013(UTC)
Posts: 416

Thanks: 8 times
Was thanked: 24 time(s) in 21 post(s)
Originally Posted by: frankgonzalez Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: DroneBee Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: frankgonzalez Go to Quoted Post
[Various attacks on DroneBee.]


Frank, this isn't a forum about you - a common criticism of you by others. I am trying to help by providing actual resources, links, and relevant cases. A 100% disabled vet was fired a day before the end of his probation even though he had a "stellar" appraisal two weeks before. Not only are the management officials weasels, they are not accountable. So let's work together to help these folks who have no support and not needlessly attack each other.

I'm sure that the Court of Public Opinion (via the 24-hour-a-day news) would like to weigh in. I would suggest that the vet contact one of these outlets as well (but only if he is ready to face the onslaught by the agency).

The only people I see who complain about my posts are those like you (less than 5 in total) who all seem to believe management can do no right and the employee is always the victim. I apologize for being pragmatic and a realist. Giving people false hope is worse than informing them of the cold hard truths of the situation. What relevant cases have you provided that show someone let go after frequent absenteeism and the agency found to be at fault? (come-on...I provided some for you earlier today, so your turn if you are being honest).

And, if the employee goes to the media, be prepared for ALL the facts to come out...like, the employee was out 40+% of the time and we tried working with him but in the end, he couldn't guarantee that he wouldn't decrease the amount of absenteeism....and THEN the other potential employers see this and avoid hiring a potential problem...and then life gets real miserable. Right now, the employee can say that due to circumstances he wasn't a good fit for the job as he was let go during probation. If they waited another week, he would be shown as being terminated for absenteeism. Which is easier to explain when looking for a job?

The employee needs to critically look at whether they can actually work full time or are their medical concerns preventing this from happening. if the latter, then they need to file a new claim with the VA regarding their disability (and a VSO can help with that). They may need to consider a different career track. A person may be a brilliant mechanic, but if they are unable to bend, lift heavy items, grip tools etc...well, maybe they should look for a new vocation. Voc Rehab at the VA may be able to assist with that. But being out 40+% of the time will impact their ability to maintain any full time position over the long term. That is a fact of life.




Right message, wrong delivery...

Not knocking you.... I'm guilty of that as well. It is called "lacking tact", among other things.
thanks 2 users thanked King_Fed for this useful post.
DroneBee on 5/5/2017(UTC), TheUnderverse15 on 5/6/2017(UTC)
djp  
#22 Posted : Saturday, May 06, 2017 1:54:22 PM(UTC)

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/11/2013(UTC)
Posts: 585

Thanks: 2 times
Was thanked: 84 time(s) in 82 post(s)
Even though ge was fired right before probation ended, he can still be protected.

For example if he coneeded time active duty yo civilian he isn't exactly a pure newbie hired.



Some agencies will fire probation employees in lieu of other RziFs

They need yo have evidence behind their just if action to fire someone. Him having a good Re ord calls that in question.

If they fire him because of medical then it's a discrimination case. He was hired knowing his disability rating.
frankgonzalez  
#23 Posted : Monday, May 08, 2017 4:21:57 AM(UTC)
frankgonzalez

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 4,226

Thanks: 40 times
Was thanked: 682 time(s) in 520 post(s)
Originally Posted by: djp Go to Quoted Post
Even though ge was fired right before probation ended, he can still be protected.

For example if he coneeded time active duty yo civilian he isn't exactly a pure newbie hired.



Some agencies will fire probation employees in lieu of other RziFs

They need yo have evidence behind their just if action to fire someone. Him having a good Re ord calls that in question.

If they fire him because of medical then it's a discrimination case. He was hired knowing his disability rating.

No it isn't a successful disability claim. Simply knowing someone has a disability rating does not mean it automatically mean it is discrimination. If the employee was out (as the OP stated) 40+% of the time, then it is an attendance issue....and as a key essential element of EVERY JOB is the ability to work the required hours per pay period, it would be easy to show the employee is not qualified to do the job.

And if the employee failed to request any accommodation to allow him to work the hours (ie telework, flex schedule, etc), then the agency is in an even stronger position. And if the supervisor sat with the employee and explained the issue with the absences and asked is there anything the supervisor could do to help the employee get his hours in...even stronger position. And they are already starting in the very secure place to begin with.

And while a military veteran does have SOME appeal rights with MSPB, I doubt this will be covered. Even if he bought back his military time, the MSPB only counts continuous time as a civilian employee, not the military time added.
You should have voted Cthulu...the greatest of all Evils
frankgonzalez  
#24 Posted : Monday, May 15, 2017 10:39:53 AM(UTC)
frankgonzalez

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 4,226

Thanks: 40 times
Was thanked: 682 time(s) in 520 post(s)
A case from the 4th Circuit is similar to this situation: Works v. Social Security Administration, 117 LRP 17809 (4th Cir. 04/26/17, unpublished).

Quote:
The agency contended that, because of her excessive absenteeism, the assistant was not a qualified individual who could perform the essential functions of her position. The 4th Circuit agreed, explaining that, unless an employee can complete her assignments from an alternate location, an employee "who does not come to work cannot perform any of her job functions, essential or otherwise." Here, the evidence showed, and the assistant admitted, that she could not receive or perform her assignments unless she was present in the office. During 50 weeks of probationary employment, she missed more than seven weeks of work. Even after taking substantial medical leave to accommodate her disability, the assistant was "unable to reach a point at which she could regularly attend work and perform her assignments." She therefore failed to establish that she was a qualified individual.

The assistant argued that her presence in the office was not essential because her duties were "distributed amongst her coworkers in her absence." The court stated that it was a "commonsense conclusion" that an employee's absence from work will result in hardship to her work group. Therefore, her presence in the office was a necessary element of her job performance even if other assistants could perform some tasks in her absence.

Note, that she had missed 14+% of the time (absent 7+ weeks out of 50), whereas the OP stated the employee in the case he was bringing up was gone 40+% of the time.

Edited by user Monday, May 15, 2017 10:40:43 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

You should have voted Cthulu...the greatest of all Evils
Random Sentient Being  
#25 Posted : Sunday, October 08, 2017 11:54:20 AM(UTC)
Random Sentient Being

Rank: Newbie

Groups: Registered
Joined: 4/29/2017(UTC)
Posts: 3
United States

Was thanked: 2 time(s) in 2 post(s)
Update: The employee was reinstated and essentially made whole. Apparently there's these people called "attorneys" who specialize in employment law. I certainly understand Frank "your rights end where my interpretation of the law begins" Gonzalez's perspective on the matter, but he was so far off course he violated Russian airspace. All kidding aside, the VA completely botched this case. This oft-repeated misnomer that probationary employees have no rights is just that, false. My advice to anyone in a similar situation is LAWYER UP! Although the process may be long and drawn out, it's worth it. The probationary system serves a valid and important purpose when supervisors are competent at their jobs, it is not a catch-all tool to summarily terminate employees.
thanks 1 user thanked Random Sentient Being for this useful post.
SD Analyst on 10/10/2017(UTC)
FS0201  
#26 Posted : Monday, October 09, 2017 9:07:44 PM(UTC)
FS0201

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 12/22/2011(UTC)
Posts: 1,010

Thanks: 69 times
Was thanked: 249 time(s) in 215 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Random Sentient Being Go to Quoted Post
Update: The employee was reinstated and essentially made whole. Apparently there's these people called "attorneys" who specialize in employment law. I certainly understand Frank "your rights end where my interpretation of the law begins" Gonzalez's perspective on the matter, but he was so far off course he violated Russian airspace. All kidding aside, the VA completely botched this case. This oft-repeated misnomer that probationary employees have no rights is just that, false. My advice to anyone in a similar situation is LAWYER UP! Although the process may be long and drawn out, it's worth it. The probationary system serves a valid and important purpose when supervisors are competent at their jobs, it is not a catch-all tool to summarily terminate employees.


It would be interesting to know what the reason for the reinstatement was, whether directed or negotiated. While it is a win for the employee, it doesn't always mean that management wasn't right in taking the action it took.
The excuse of, "I read it on FederalSoup..." won't work. Please do your due diligence.
thanks 1 user thanked FS0201 for this useful post.
SD Analyst on 10/10/2017(UTC)
frankgonzalez  
#27 Posted : Tuesday, October 10, 2017 3:01:35 AM(UTC)
frankgonzalez

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)
Posts: 4,226

Thanks: 40 times
Was thanked: 682 time(s) in 520 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Random Sentient Being Go to Quoted Post
Update: The employee was reinstated and essentially made whole. Apparently there's these people called "attorneys" who specialize in employment law. I certainly understand Frank "your rights end where my interpretation of the law begins" Gonzalez's perspective on the matter, but he was so far off course he violated Russian airspace. All kidding aside, the VA completely botched this case. This oft-repeated misnomer that probationary employees have no rights is just that, false. My advice to anyone in a similar situation is LAWYER UP! Although the process may be long and drawn out, it's worth it. The probationary system serves a valid and important purpose when supervisors are competent at their jobs, it is not a catch-all tool to summarily terminate employees.
My comments were based solely on what was presented here. Every case has other facts that need considering. And, as FS201 pointed out, was this a decision or a settlement agreement? If the former, then I am guessing an accommodation request was made but ignored. If the latter, the same issue may have been the reason to do so...or management failed to properly document the absences, etc. and the attorneys for the agency didn't want to try their luck, etc.



You should have voted Cthulu...the greatest of all Evils
Rss Feed  Atom Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
2 Pages<12
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.


This page was generated in 0.640 seconds.