COLLABORATION -- CONSISTENCY -- CONFLICT RESOLUTION
CO-SPONSORED
BY:
CIVIL
RIGHTS – EMPLOYMENT COMPLAINTS
EARLY
INTERVENTION – DISPUTE RESOLUTION
HUMAN
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT – EMPLOYEE RELATIONS
Last Revised July 3, 2000
EARLY INTERVENTION PROGRAM (EIP)
Description
of the Process
· Purpose
and Use:
The purpose of the
Early Intervention Program (EIP) is to assist the parties experiencing conflict
in resolving the conflict themselves.
EIP seeks to create a non-adversarial setting where issues can be openly
discussed and solutions explored. EIP
serves as an alternative, not a replacement for, the formal systems of redress,
namely grievances, discrimination complaints, and appeals. EIP also serves as the Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) resource for mediation of EEO complaints at both the informal
and formal stages. That process is
described in detail in the standard operating procedure for the Employment
Complaints Process.
Statutory/regulatory/policy
basis:
1. Administrative
Dispute Resolution Act of 1996
2. Executive
Order 12871 (labor-management partnerships)
3. April
1997 Forest Service EIP Plan
4. Secretary's
Memorandum 4710-1, March 23, 2000, USDA Alternative Dispute Resolution Policy
5. NFFE-Forest
Service Master Agreement
6.
MSPB Final Ruling giving an automatic 30-day extension for filing an
appeal when the parties agree to use ADR
· Who
can use
The program is available for use by any
employee, regardless of appointment, and enrollees.
· What
can be resolved through the EIP?
Virtually any
workplace dispute can be addressed through the EIP if all involved parties are
willing. It is recognized that certain
situations, namely those involving criminal activities or those that are so
egregious in nature (e.g. sexual harassment, other serious forms of misconduct)
that they would not be appropriate for EIP action. Future plans are for EIP to be used for program execution
conflicts with customers and constituents.
EIP is triggered whenever the parties to a conflict agree to use an EIP
neutral to attempt resolution of their problem. The focus is on identifying the underlying causes of the conflict
and restoring/repairing working relationships.
· What
comprises an EIP case?
An EIP case usually
consists of the party bringing forward the issue(s) and a responding
party. Supervisors/managers can also
refer employees who are in conflict to the EIP. With coaching
from the EIP intake
person, the parties come to the mediation prepared to articulate their concerns
and to discuss constructive ways to address those concerns with the assistance
of a third party neutral (mediator).
The mediation participants listen to each other’s concerns and try to
focus on the desired future. A
mediation model is followed to surface and resolve the issues. Case file information consists solely of a
record that contact to the program was made, whether a mediation was held, and
a copy of the agreement if an agreement was reached and put in writing. While the parties elect whether to have a
written agreement, it is strongly recommended.
**Note: Please reference the Employment Complaints
Process section of the Dispute Resolution Guide for an explanation of the
handling of settlement agreements in EIP mediations of discrimination
complaints.
· Timeframes
associated with the process
Response standards
specify that the EIP practitioner will respond in no more than two (2) business
days to a request for EIP assistance.
Arrangements for EIP to begin will be established normally no later than
five (5) business days after the EIP official has contacted the parties. There is no timeframe associated with making
contact with an EIP practitioner as exist in the case of an EEO complaint or
grievance. However, the individual
making this contact is fully informed by the EIP practitioner in the initial
intake of the timeframes associated with these other redress avenues.
· Whom
to contact for information & to initiate the process
An EIP manager or
other designated intake person can be contacted to get information or request
mediation assistance. Lists of managers
who provide service to all employees in all FS units have been distributed and
will be available on an EIP website.
(See Exhibit 1 for a listing of EIP Managers.)
· Roles
of responsible parties
Person with issue/concern - this person
should be able to: clearly explain the nature of the conflict; be willing to
engage in candid dialogue with the responding party, and; be willing to work
constructively with the assistance of a mediator to resolve identified
issues. Note: The person with the issue/concern may also be a supervisor or
manager who refers others to the EIP for assistance.
Responding party - the role of the
responding party is essentially the same as that for the person who initially
brings the issue to EIP. The responding
party is expected to be fully engaged in identifying and resolving issues by
engaging in constructive dialogue with the other party. It is essential that both the person with
the issue/concern and responding party have the authority to resolve their
issues.
.
EIP Manager - Agency official responsible for EIP program for a
FS organizational unit,
including arranging mediations, evaluating program effectiveness, and
serving as liaison
with Civil Rights, Human Resources, and other ADR officials.
EIP
Intake Person - Records basic case information prescribed by the EIP
Manager,
including whether the person's concerns are being pursued in other
dispute forums.
Mediator (neutral) - The EIP neutral is responsible for
conducting the mediation and
assuring that the parties follow the process rules. It should be noted that the role of
the mediator is not to decide the matter for the parties.
Representatives of the parties - rules,
regulations, law, and collective bargaining agreements define their roles. All parties in EIP are entitled to
representation. The EIP manager will
resolve any questions concerning the appropriateness of a representative.
Technical advisor. ER and CR Specialists
who provide advice to the parties during mediation on a variety of issues.
· Decision
points for each party built in to the process
Because EIP is a
voluntary process, there are decision points at all stages. For instance, the parties are encouraged to
decide upfront whether to use EIP for possible resolution before pursuing one
of the formal dispute resolution channels, but may also initiate an EIP request
at any time during any other dispute resolution process. The person with the concern makes an
election, after hearing from the EIP intake person about the different options for
redress, whether to continue with EIP.
Likewise, the responding party chooses whether to participate in EIP or
not. The parties can also choose to
discontinue mediation once it has begun.
The parties must also choose whether to agree to written or verbal terms
of resolution that might develop from the mediation session. Finally, the person with the concern has the
option of discontinuing the EIP process at any stage in favor of pursuing one
of the other dispute resolution processes.
· Settlement
guidelines and resources
EIP agreements vary
widely depending on the issues raised.
Agreements do not have the same legal authority that would be present in
the case of an EEO complaint (Title VII).
EIP Agreements are expected to be executed in good faith by the
parties. In EIP Agreements, a premium
is placed on creativity and in assisting the parties to devise a solution that
they are comfortable with. If either
party believes an agreement has been breached, they have the option to pursue
additional EIP mediation or seek relief of their concerns through other
available dispute forums. Agreements
must still be legal and in conformance with any applicable collective
bargaining agreement. This may entail
contacting specialists in Human Resources, EEO, or the Office of General
Counsel, to assure legality.
EMPLOYMENT
COMPLAINTS PROCESS (ECP)
Description of the Current
Process
· Purpose and Use:
The purpose of the Employment
Complaints Process (ECP) is to provide counseling and complaint resolution
services for employees and applicants in compliance with governing laws,
regulations, and the USDA/FS employment discrimination (EEO) complaint
program. ECP facilitates the resolution
of EEO complaints.
Statutory/regulatory/policy
basis:
1. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
as amended
2. Rehabilitation in Employment Act of 1973,
Section 501
3. Equal Pay Act of 1963, as amended
4. Age Discrimination in Employment Act of
1967, as amended
5. EEOC Management Directive 110, Federal
Sector Employment
Discrimination
Complaint Processing Manual
6. USDA DR 4300-7, Processing EEO Complaints of
Discrimination
7. 29 Code of Federal Regulation 1614, et al,
as amended
8. FSM 1760 - Equal Employment Opportunity
9. USDA & FS Policy on Settlement
Agreements
10. Secretary's
Memorandum 4710-1, March 23, 2000, USDA Alternative Dispute Resolution Policy
· Who
can use:
The process is
available for use by any employee (regardless of appointment), former employee,
or applicant for employment with FS and/or USDA who believes s/he is the victim
of discrimination.
· What
can be resolved through the ECP?
Any action and/or
inaction of the Agency and/or its representatives that affect the work life of
an employee and/or applicant for employment for which they believe themselves
to be a victim of employment discrimination, can be addressed. The actions and/or inactions are believed to
be motivated by a prohibited factor [discriminatory bases) such as: race,
color, sex/gender (including sexual harassment), age (40 years of age and
older), national origin, physical/mental disability, religion, and reprisal for
participation in or support for activities related to any of these factors, may
be brought to this process.
Employees and/or
applicants may also use the ECP if they believe they have been subject to
discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or marital status. Issues attributed to these bases may be
processed through to a Departmental administratve decision on the merits. Decisions based on these two factors will
not receive appeal rights to EEOC.
· What comprises an EEO complaint?
An EEO complaint
consists of the aggrieved person bringing forward a timely employment related
concern (Issue), attributing the cause of the concern to be based on (Basis)
one or more of the prohibited factors (i.e. race, color, religion, sex
[including sexual harassment], national origin, age, physical or mental
handicap, reprisal) as covered by 29 Code of Federal Regulations 1614. The complainant is required to describe the
behavior/decision that has occurred, date/time of the incident, parties
involved, and harm suffered.
· Timeframes
associated with the process
The
first step for an employee or applicant who believes he or she has been
discriminated against by a federal agency (e.g., FS) is to contact an equal
employment opportunity (EEO) counselor at the agency where the alleged
discrimination took place within 45 calendar days of the alleged discriminatory
action. Counseling must be completed
within 30 calendar days of contact with the EEO Counselor. Prior to the end of the 30-day period, the
person with the issue may agree in writing to postpone the final interview with
the EEO Counselor and extend the traditional counseling effort for an
additional period of no more than 60 days.
During
the initial interview with the EEO Counselor, the individual will be informed of
the option to have their issue(s) addressed through the Forest Service's
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Process, namely the Early Intervention
Program (EIP). The EIP relies on
face-to-face mediation as the primary ADR technique. The pre-complaint processing period shall be 90 days where the
aggrieved person chooses to participate in mediation (ADR) through the
EIP. The complainant must make an ADR
election within the first 30 days from the date of the initial interview. The resolving management official has 10
calendar days after notification of complainant's ADR election to elect or
decline participation in EIP. Agency
decisions on whether to participate in ADR will be based on the criteria set
forth in the USDA/FS Settlement Policy contained in the Resolution Model.
If the
claim is not resolved either through traditional counseling or ADR, the
individual is issued a notice of their right to file a formal EEO complaint
with the Department (i.e., Office of Civil Rights, USDA). The formal complaint must be filed within 15
days of receipt of this notice.
The
Department must acknowledge receipt of the complaint and make a determination
to accept or dismiss it, and if accepted, conduct a complete and fair
investigation within 180 days of initial receipt.
If the
complaint is one that does not contain issues that are appealable to the Merit
Systems Protection Board (MSPB), at the conclusion of the investigation, the
complainant has the option to request either a hearing by an Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission (EEOC) administrative judge (AJ) or an immediate final
decision by the employing agency, i.e., the Department of Agriculture.
If a
hearing is requested, the AJ must process the request for a hearing, issue
findings of fact and conclusions of law, and order an appropriate remedy within
180 days.
After
the final decision of the Department, the complainant may appeal to the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) within 30 days or may file in U S.
District Court within 90 days. Either party may request reconsideration of a
decision made by the Commission. The complainant may also seek judicial review.
Traditional EEO Counseling and Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR)
Traditional
EEO Counseling and ADR as conducted by the Early Intervention Program bear some
similarities, but also have some significant differences. In order for a complainant to make an
informed decision as to which to elect, the dispute resolution practitioner
should be able to discuss the differences between the similar but distinct
functions of EEO counseling and EIP.
The
EEO Counselor performs these functions:
1) Explains the EEO complaint process under
29 CFR Part 1614;
2) Discusses the Early Intervention Program
and explains the election option, i.e., the procedure for selecting ADR or
traditional counseling;
3) Determines the claim(s) and basis(es)
raised by the aggrieved person;
4) Conducts a limited inquiry to obtain
information: (a) to identify jurisdictional questions (e.g. timeliness); and,
(b) for settlement purposes;
5) Seeks a resolution of the dispute at the
lowest possible level, unless the aggrieved person elects to participate in
EIP;
6) Documents the resolution if one occurs
during counseling or assists the EIP mediator in finalizing the agreement
gained during an EIP mediation;
Note: In the case
of an informal complaint, the EEO Counselor will serve as the lead in assuring
that settlement agreements receive required approvals. For formal complaints, this responsibility
resides with the controlling Employee Relations Office.
7) Advises the complainant of his/her right
to file a formal complaint if attempts to resolve the dispute through EEO
counseling or EIP; and,
8) Prepares a report sufficient to document
that the EEO Counselor undertook the required counseling actions, referred the
person to EIP based on their request for ADR, and addressed any jurisdictional
questions.
The
EIP mediator performs these functions:
1) Serves as a neutral and impartial third
party who intervenes in a dispute but has no decision-making authority. The mediator may have the benefit of the
information gathered during the intake phase by the EEO Counselor relative to
issue(s) and basis(es). Mediations are
normally conducted in which the parties meet face-to-face in non-workplace environments.
2) Makes primarily procedural suggestions
regarding how the parties can reach an agreement;
3) May suggest substantive options as a
means of encouraging the parties to expand the range of possible resolutions
under consideration;
4) Conducts joint discussions or, depending
on the circumstances, in caucuses to explore resolution options or develop
proposals that might move the parties closer to resolution;
5) Assists the parties in developing a
settlement agreement that is in compliance with agency policy. Sends a copy of the settlement agreement to
the referring EEO Counselor and/or to Employee Relations for final agency review
and processing in accordance with agency policy.
6) Establishes a record that a mediation
took place and that an agreement was or was not reached.
· Whom to
contact for information & to initiate the process
Informal - Precomplaint Stage
To
initiate an informal complaint, an individual should contact a field Employment
Complaints Program (ECP) Counselor assigned to their region/station/area. A list of ECP Centers and staff members are
available for each FS work unit through the Civil Rights website,
local/national posters, by contacting the Washington Office Civil Rights Staff,
Employment Complaints Program staff member, or any Civil Rights Office. Points of Contact for each ECP Service
Center are listed at Exhibit 2. A
listing of FS Civil Rights Directors is located at Exhibit 3.
Formal
Complaint Stage
To
initiate a formal complaint, the complainant or complainant's official
representative who has been designated in writing by the complainant, must
submit a formal complaint form to USDA's Office of Civil Rights (CR) within 15
calndar days of receipt of the notice of right to file a complaint. The address and telephone/fax numbers are
provided in the notice. A complaint may
be mailed, faxed or submitted in person.
Contact information is posted on the WO/local Civil Rights website for
both informal and formal stages.
· FILING AN APPEAL WITH THE EEOC.
If the
agency dismisses all or part of a complaint, a dissatisfied complainant may
file an expedited appeal, within 30 days of notice of the dismissal, with the
EEOC, with a copy to the Department.
A
complainant may also appeal a final agency decision to the EEOC within 30 days
of notice of the decision. The EEOC will examine the record and issue a
decision. November 1999 changes to EEOC
regulations (29 CFR 1614) and their Management Directive (MD 110) describe
numerous modifications to the administrative processing of claims of employment
discrimination. Each decision made
regarding a complaint will include appeal rights and responsibilities.
If the
complaint is on a matter that is appealable to the Merit Systems Protection
Board (e.g., a mixed case, such as a termination of a career employee), the
complainant may appeal the final agency decision to the MSPB within 20 days of
receipt or go to District Court within 30 days. The complainant may petition
the EEOC for review of the MSPB decision concerning the claim of
discrimination.
· Roles of responsible parties
Complainant - The complainant is required to describe the
behavior/decision/incident that has occurred, date/time of the incident,
parties involved, why they believe the incident to be discriminatory, and the
harm suffered. The complainant is
responsible for fully cooperating with the presentation of information and
working to reasonably resolve their complaint.
Responding Official -
The person(s) named by complainant or indicated by the record as responsible,
in whole or in part, for taking or recommending the action/incident at issue in
the complaint. The responding official
is responsible for their active participation in the consultation and ADR
efforts of the agency to attempt resolution of the complaint. In some situations, the Responding Official
may also be the Resolving Official.
(See below for a description of the role of the Resolving Official)
EEO Counselor - The
counselor is responsible for conducting the initial counseling with the
complainant to clarify the claim and identify the issues and bases of the
complaint, advise the parties of their role, rights and responsibilities,
discuss the Early Intervention Program, and explain the election option. Refer complainants who elect to use an
alternate dispute resolution forum to the appropriate FS Early Intervention
Program manager.
The counselor is also responsible for conducting an informal inquiry,
notifying and actively working with appropriate responding official(s) (RO) and
the RO's servicing Employee Relations Office. Advises the RO of their rights and responsibilities to actively
participate in any dispute resolution effort.
Works with the parties using a variety of resolution strategies in
applying the Forest Service Resolution Model to develop options for resolving
the complaint. Also prepares legally
sound resolution agreements consistent with agency policy (e.g., the USDA/FS
Delegation of Authority & Settlement Policy). Routinely collaborates with the Employee Relations counterpart in
preparing the necessary justification to accompany settlement proposals.
EIP Program Manager - This person serves as the provider of ADR
services, typically mediation. The EIP Manager, when contacted by the EEO
Counselor about an ADR election, will take the lead in arranging for the
mediation. This will include discussing
ADR with the Responding Official (RO), obtaining the RO’s concurrence to
participate in ADR, and contacting all involved parties with the arrangements
for the mediation. The EIP Manager may
secure mediation from any of the following sources: contract mediator; Federal Executive Board neutral; another USDA
agency; FS EIP mediator; an EEO Counselor who was not involved in the intake
and inquiry on the particular case.
Upon completion of the ADR process, the EIP Manager will coordinate with
the EEO counselor to insure that the any settlement agreement meets EEO
requirements or notify the counselor that resolution was not reached.
Employee Relations (ER). ER actively works with the responding and resolving officials and the
counselors during the precomplaint/informal process to develop and ensure
settlement options comply with applicable agency policies, Federal Regulations,
and law. Also serves as the point of
contact for the counselors
(pre-complaint) and complaint investigators (formal complaint) to
provide human resources technical advice relevant to the case. In formal complaints, applies the FS
Resolution model and works with the parties to develop resolution options. Will prepares legally sound resolution
agreements along with necessary justification statement. Normally, represents the agency in third
party proceedings.
Representatives of the Parties.
Rules, regulations, and law define their roles. Complainant is entitled to representation as
long as that representative's interest and/or position is not in conflict with
their role (e.g. a current HRM/CR employee).
The responding official may have his or her own representative who is
not provided by the agency. The
resolving official receives technical advice from an Employee Relations/Human
Resource Management specialist.
Resolving Officials. Agency management officials are FS
employees with the delegated authority to settle complaints of discrimination
within the authority issued in the USDA/FS Settlement Policy. The Resolving Official may be the responding
official if that person has the authority to resolve the matter in dispute. Resolving officials are encouraged to use
ADR to resolve complaints.
Technical Representatives. ER
and CR Specialists who provide advice to the parties during mediations, on a
variety of issues.
Agency Representative. An
agency official, typically an ER Specialist, who represents management's interests
in resolution of the dispute.
DECISION POINTS FOR EACH PARTY BUILT IN TO THE PROCESS:
In the Forest
Service, ADR services are provided through the Early Intervention Program
(EIP). The use of ADR in lieu of
traditional counseling is voluntary by both parties (i.e. the complainant and
responding official). By regulation,
the counselor must advise the parties of the availability of ADR services
during the precomplaint/informal stage of the process. If ADR is elected, the precomplaint/informal
stage is automatically extended to 90 days starting from the date of contact
with the EEO Counselor. It should be
noted that the agency and the complainant could agree, in a settlement, that
the agency may pay attorney's fees for precomplaint/informal process
representation in accordance with 29 C.F.R. 1614.501 (e). There is no prohibition on agencies paying
precomplaint/informal attorney's fees.
While the emphasis
will be on face-to-face mediation as the primary ADR vehicle, the EIP manager
can use other methods as appropriate.
Since ADR is
voluntary, the Complainant may choose not to use EIP services, elect
traditional counseling, and/or file a formal complaint at the end of the
initial 30-day period. The agency
responding official may elect not to engage in ADR based on an application of
the FS Resolution Model. ADR is also
available to the parties at the formal complaint stage.
The Department
assumes responsibility for adjudication of the complaint once it is
formal. The Department's Office of Civil
Rights will notify the complainant and the Agency of accepted claims and obtain
an investigation of those claims. The
Department encourages employees and agencies to formally and/or informally
resolves claims and problems of complainants at any stage of the complaint
process.
· Settlement
guidelines and resources
The Forest Service
has issued supplemental guidance in light of the Department's latest
instruction regarding complaint settlements.
EEO settlements must have the legal authority applicable to the
laws/regulations governing the type of discrimination alleged. (See Delegation of Authority Guidance at
Exhibit 4.
INDIVIDUAL INFORMAL EEO COMPLAINT
PROCESS



ADR (EIP) Election Traditional EEO Counseling
Counselor Contact
* If agency doesn’t
implement or appeal the decision, it becomes final, and is enforceable by
EEOC HQ (OFO)

ADMINISTRATIVE
GRIEVANCE SYSTEM (AGS)
Description
of the Process
· Purpose
and Use:
The purpose of the
Administrative Grievance Process (AGS) is to facilitate the expeditious
processing of grievances through a fair, equitable, and simple procedure.
Statutory/regulatory/policy
basis:
Regulations and
guidance can be found in USDA Personnel Manual Chapter 771 (May 1993), Title 5
Part 771, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), and in other related
issuances.
· Who
can use:
This grievance
system applies to all Forest Service employees who are not included in an exclusively
recognized bargaining unit. Bargaining
unit employees are covered by their applicable negotiated grievance procedures.
· What
can be resolved through the AGS?
This process
applies to any matter of concern or dissatisfaction relating to the employment
of an employee, which is subject to the control of agency management. Employees should be encouraged, and
managers/supervisors should be receptive, to having these concerns addressed
through the Early Intervention Program.
There are however, a number of matters that are specifically excluded
from coverage under the AGS. They
include:
1. Contents of established agency regulations
or policy;
2. Matters grievable by a bargaining unit
employee under their applicable Negotiated Grievance Procedure (NGP);
3. Matters in which the employee is entitled to
file an appeal or other formal challenge for which the following organizations
have authority to grant a remedy: Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), Office
of Personnel Management (OPM), Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA), or
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC);
4. Nonselection for promotion from a group of
properly rated and certified candidates;
5. Failure to receive a noncompetitive
promotion;
6. A proposed action that, if effected, would
entitle the employee to grieve or appeal;
7. Termination of a probationer;
8. The substance of performance elements or
standards;
9. The granting or failing to grant an award,
or its amount;
10. The termination or expiration of a time limited
(e.g. temporary) appointment.
· What
comprises an administrative grievance and the timeframes associated with the
process?
The employee
presents a timely, informal grievance to his/her supervisor either orally or in
writing within 15 calendar days of the date of the event causing the grievance,
or the date the employee became aware of the event. The supervisor either forwards the grievance to the official who
has authority to address the grievance or retains control of the case or
determines whether it is possible to resolve the grievance through corrective
action, clarification, or other actions at the informal stage.
If the grievance
cannot be resolved, the supervisor issues a memorandum describing the informal
grievance, the resolution efforts, and the proper procedures for filing a
formal grievance, including the name of the designated agency official with
which it should be filed. If the
grievance is not resolved or rejected, the designated agency official issues a
proposed disposition within 90 calendar days after the date the grievance was
presented by the employee. The proposed
disposition contains:
a. The agency's position on the grievance
issues and whether any corrective actions will be taken;
b. The employee's right to request a final
decision by the Chief, with or without referral to the USDA - Office of Human
Resources Management (OHRM) for a grievance examiner;
c. The timeframe to initiate a final decision
request (10 days from receipt of the proposed disposition);
d. A statement that the proposed disposition
will become the USDA's final decision unless the grievant files a timely
request for review.
· Whom
to contact for information and to initiate the process
The grievance
should be presented to the grievant supervisor. For information concerning the processing of a grievance under
the administrative grievance process, contacts should be directed to the
grievant servicing personnel office.
· Roles
of responsible parties
Grievant - he/she is expected to initiate a timely
grievance, and articulate (orally or in writing) the matter being grieved, and
the relief being sought. If
represented, the grievant is expected to designate their representative in
writing and notify the supervisor or designated official processing the
grievance.
Supervisor - receives and /or refers the grievance to
the management official having the authority to accept the grievance and
resolve the matter at issue. Writes or
ensures the writing of the memorandum closing the informal stage.
Designated
agency official - the
authorized management official who accepts or rejects the grievance, admits or
disallows representatives, adjudicates the matter, and who issues a proposed
disposition.
Employee's
representative - may be a Forest Service employee who accompanies, represents,
and advises the grievant. Designation
must be in writing by the grievant.
Both the grievant and representative shall be granted a reasonable
amount of official time to present the grievance if otherwise on duty. The designated representative may be
disallowed in writing if management determines the representative would:
a. Be in a position of which there is a
conflict of interest;
b. Be required to perform other priority work
for the agency; or,
c. Give rise to unreasonable delays in the
processing of the grievance and/or unreasonable costs to the agency.
Washington
Office, Labor-Management, Employee Relations & Performance Branch
(WO-LMERP) - Receives and
processes grievances for either a decision by the Chief or referral to the USDA
Office of Human Resources Management for review by a grievance examiner.
USDA-OHRM
Grievance Examiner - Receives
and adjudicates unresolved grievances referred by the WO-LMERP Branch, issuing
a recommended decision for final action by the Chief.
Chief (or
designee) - issues final
agency decision on grievances, or acts on recommendations made by the USDA-OHRM
Grievance Examiner.
· Decision
points for each party built into the process
All involved
parties are encouraged to consider using the Early Intervention Program early
in the process of dealing with the grievance.
Of course, EIP could be used at any stage, informal or formal, if the
parties so choose. Supervisors must
ascertain whether they have the authority to address grievant concerns, and if
not, refer the grievance to someone who can.
· Settlement
guidelines and resources
Any grievance
resolution must be legal and in compliance with agency regulations. Those resolving administrative grievances
are encouraged to contact Human Resources to assure regulation compliance.


NEGOTIATED
GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE (NGP)
Description
of the Process
· Purpose
and Use:
The purpose of the
Negotiated Grievance Procedure (NGP) is to provide the expeditious processing
of grievances through a fair, equitable, and simple procedure. For those employees represented by the
National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE), the NGP is contained in
Article 9 of the Master Agreement between Forest Service and NFFE-Forest
Service Council and is summarized in this Guide.
Note: It
is recognized that there are labor-management agreements between the Forest
Service and other Unions at the Local level (i.e. American Federation of
Government Employees and the National Association of Government
Employees). Those employees represented
by one of these labor organizations are covered by NGP procedures found in
their respective contracts.
Statutory/regulatory/policy
basis:
The controlling
statute can be found in 5 USC, Chapter 71, Subchapter 3, Section 7121 of the
Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute.
· Who
can use:
Any bargaining unit
employee covered by a negotiated grievance procedure.
· What
can be resolved through the NGP?
Any matter related
to employment if grievance is filed by a labor organization or bargaining unit
employee can be addressed through the NGP.
Any claimed violation, misinterpretation, or misapplication of any law,
rule, or regulation affecting conditions of employment may also be
addressed. Finally, the effect or
interpretation of the collective bargaining agreement or a claim of breach of
the contract may be grieved. Bargaining
unit employees are encouraged to consider the assistance of the Early
Intervention Program (EIP). They should
consult with their union officials and labor relation’s specialists regarding
the use of EIP and the possibility of holding grievance timeframes in abeyance
when using EIP.
Some matters are
not subject to being grieved under the NGP.
The grievance procedure does not apply to issues related to:
1. Any claimed violation of 5 USC Chapter 73,
Subchapter III, relating to prohibited political activities (Hatch Act);
2. Retirement, life insurance, or health
insurance;
3. A suspension or removal under 5 USC 7532
(national security reasons);
4. Any examination or certification
administered by Office of Personnel Management;
5. Appointments;
6. The classification of any position that does
not result in the reduction in grade or pay of an
Employee;
7. Reduction-in-force or furloughs of more than
thirty days;
8. Separations during a probationary or trial
period;
9. Separation or reduction in grade taken
against specific employees who have no statutory right to appeal those adverse
personnel actions to MSPB;
10. Bills of collection issued to employees that
are covered by special process in Article 22, Section 9 of the Master
Agreement;
11. Collections from accountable officers; or,
12. Determination of exempt/nonexempt status and
claims for compensation under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
· What
comprises a negotiated grievance? [This applies to the NFFE Master Agreement
only]
The grievance process
is comprised of three steps:
Step 1: The grievance is submitted in writing by the
grievant or union representative to the first level line manager or equivalent
staff (e.g. District Ranger, Job Corps
Center Department Head, RO/WO Group Leader/Branch Chief, Station Project
Leader/Group Leader etc.).
Step 2: If the grievant is not satisfied with the
Step 1 decision, then the grievant or union representative may elevate the
grievance in writing to the appropriate management official (e.g., Center Director,
Forest Supervisor, Staff Director, Assistant Director, etc.).
Step 3: If the grievant is not satisfied with the
Step 2 decision, then the grievant or union representative may elevate the
grievance in writing to the appropriate management official: Regional Forester, Job Corps Field Office
Director, Deputy Chief for Business Operations, or Station Director or
Director, Forest Products Laboratory.
· Timeframes
associated with the process
Step 1: The grievance must be filed within 30
calendar days of the incident or reasonable awareness of the incident. The decision will be sent or delivered
within 21 calendar days from the date the grievance is received.
Step 2: The grievance may be elevated to the next
level within 21 calendar days after receipt or delivery of the Step 1
decision. The Step 2 decision will be
sent or delivered within 21 calendar days from the date the grievance is
received by the Step 2 deciding official.
.
Step 3: If the grievant is not satisfied with the
Step 2 decision, then the grievance may be further elevated in writing within
21 days after receipt of the decision.
The final written decision will be sent or delivered within 30 days of
receipt of the Step 2 decision.
An automatic 7-day
extension will be granted if requested by either party and if the reason for
the delay is stated. In addition, when
information is requested from a party that is needed and applicable to the
grievance, then an extension will be granted that equals the amount of time
required to receive the requested information.
As noted above under the "What can be resolved"
section, timeframes may be adjusted to allow for use of the Early Intervention Program
with the parties' concurrence.
· Whom
to contact for information & to initiate the process
Bargaining unit
employees are to contact their Union Local.
In the case of Law Enforcement and Investigations, the bargaining unit
employee contacts the Local who represents the unit on which they perform the
duties of their position.
· Roles
of responsible parties
Grievant - the grievant role is to identify the nature
of the grievance, provide a summary of the issues, and present the relief
requested (in writing). If the grievant
elevates the grievance, then the grievant is responsible for providing this
information, and also the unresolved issues and the relief requested.
Local Bargaining
Unit - if the Union Local
files a grievance on behalf of a bargaining unit member employee, then their
role is the same as the grievant specified above. However, in addition to this role, the locals also have the
obligation to represent the interests of the bargaining unit members included
in the unit as a whole.
Management
Official - the management
official's role is to first determine whether they have the authority to grant
the remedy requested. If so, then they
analyze the information provided by the grievant, and then gather any
additional information needed to render a decision on the grievance. If they do not have the authority, then they
must promptly elevate the grievance to the appropriate level.
Personnel/Labor
Relations Specialist - the
role of the specialist is to provide advice and counsel to the responding
management official. This may include
an assessment of the nature of the grievance, the appropriateness of the remedy
requested, how timeframes are established, and how grievances are elevated.
· Decision
points for each party built into the process
Grievant/Local
Bargaining Unit: For the grievant or the Union Local, the
first decision point is whether to file a grievance. Consideration should be given to use of ADR (i.e., EIP) prior to or after a grievance is
filed. They must also recognize that by
filing a step 1 grievance where employment discrimination is being alleged,
they are electing a dispute forum and precluding themselves from filing a
formal EEO complaint on the same issue.
Under the
Negotiated Grievance Procedure (NGP), the grievant must assess at the end of
each step whether to elevate the grievance.
The final decision point for the Union is whether to take the issues
being grieved to arbitration, if a Step 3 decision has been issued. In lieu of or in addition to arbitration,
the grievant may elect to pursue the grievance, which includes allegations of
discrimination to the EEOC.
Responding/Resolving
Official: The first decision point is after the
grievance is filed. Decision points
then exist when and if the grievance is elevated.
Settlement
Guidelines/Resources:
Externally - There are no laws or regulations requiring
either Party to settle grievances.
Internally - The Master Agreement at Article 9.4,
Subsection a, and 9.6, Subsection b, encourage the parties to resolve disputes
before or after a grievance has been filed, using the Early Intervention
Program (EIP) or other mutually agreed
ADR processes.
It should also be
noted that at steps 2 and 3 of the NGP in Article 9.6, contract language
highlights the option for the parties to use ADR to resolve the dispute.
Incident/Action being grieved *





MERIT SYSTEMS
PROTECTION BOARD (MSPB)
(Mixed Case
Appeals)
Description of the Current Process
· Purpose and
Use:
The Merit Systems Protection Board's mission is to
ensure that Federal employees are protected against abuses by agency
management, that Executive branch agencies make employment decisions in
accordance with the Merit System Principles and that Federal merit systems are
kept free of prohibited personnel practices.
Most Federal employees may appeal various personnel actions affecting
them to the Board. The Board encourages
the parties to explore settlement of issues at any time during the appeal
process to obviate the need for an administrative hearing. As noted under the Timeframes section in
this guide, the Board regulations extend the appeal filing time for an
additional 30 days where the parties mutually agree to attempt resolution through
ADR.
Statutory/regulatory/policy basis:
1. Civil
Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA), P.L. 95-454
2. The
regulatory authority for the MSPB can be found under 5 C.F.R. 1201.
· Who can use
Employees who may appeal adverse actions and
performance based actions are:
A)
Competitive service employees generally not serving a probationary or
trial period under an initial appointment.
B) Career
appointees to the Senior Executive Service.
C)
Non-competitive service preference eligible employees with one or more
years of current continuous service (i.e., employees with veterans preference.)
D)
Non-preference eligibles excepted service employees who have completed
their probationary period or with two or more years of current continuous
service.
The following employees generally do not have a right
to appeal to the MSPB, or the rights are restricted:
A)
Probationary employees. They
have very limited appeal rights. They
may appeal a termination based on political affiliation or marital status and
they may appeal a termination based on conditions arising before employment on
the grounds that the termination was not in accordance with regulations.
B)
Non-appropriated fund activity employees.
C) Employees
serving under a temporary appointment limited to one year or less.
D) An
employee in a bargaining unit that has a negotiated grievance procedure
covering any actions that may be appealed to the Board. This category of employee normally must
pursue a grievance through the negotiated grievance procedure.
· What can be
appealed to the MSPB?
The Civil Service Reform Act authorized the Board to
hear appeals of various agency actions. Most appealable matters fall into the
following categories:
1. Reduction
in grade or removal for unacceptable performance.
2. Removal,
reduction in grade or pay, suspension for more than 14 days, or furlough for 30
days or less for cause that will promote the efficiency of the service.
3.
Separation, reduction in grade or furlough for more than 30 days, when
the action was effected because of a reduction in force.
4.
Reduction-in-force action affecting a career appointee in the Senior
Executive Service.
5.
Reconsideration decision sustaining a negative determination of
competence (i.e. within grade increase denial) for a General Schedule employee.
6.
Disqualification of an employee or applicant because of a suitability
determination.
7. OPM
determination on retirement matters.
8. Denial of
restoration or re-employment rights.
An action that is appealable to the Board that also
contains an allegation of employment discrimination is called a mixed case
complaint or appeal. A ``mixed case
complaint'' is a complaint of employment discrimination filed with a Federal
agency based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age handicap, or
reprisal related to or stemming from an action that may be appealed to the
MSPB. The complaint may contain only an
allegation of employment discrimination or it may contain additional
non-discrimination allegations that the MSPB has jurisdiction to address. A ``mixed case appeal is an appeal filed
directly with the MSPB that alleges that an appealable agency action was effected, in whole or in part, because of
discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin,
handicap,
or age.
· What comprises an MSPB appeal?
The employee first timely notifies an MSPB Regional
or Field Office of his/her intent to appeal the agency action, by completing
and submitting the agency supplied appeal form. Included is a designation of representative form that the
appellant must complete if they have representation. The Board makes a
preliminary ruling on the issues of timeliness and jurisdiction, and accepts or
rejects the appeal.
· Timeframes
associated with the process
Appeals, including Mixed Case Appeals, filed directly
with the MSPB.
The appeal must be filed within 30 calendar days of
the effective date of the action, if the notice of the action sets an effective
date. (If the 30th day falls
on a Saturday, Sunday , or Federal holiday, the filing deadline is extended to
the next working day) In the case of actions that do not set an effective date
(e.g. OPM retirement determinations, denial of within grade increase) the
appeal must be filed within the time specified in the Board regulations. The date of filing by mail is considered to
be the postmark date. The date of
filing by fax is considered the date of the fax.
The Board regulations at 5 CFR 1201.22(b)(1) extend
the 30 day filing time limit by an additional 30 days, for a total of 60
days, where an appellant and an agency
mutually agree in writing to attempt to resolve their dispute through an ADR
process.
Once an initial decision of a Board administrative
judge has become final, or the Board has issued a final decision on a petition
for review, the appellant can seek review of the final decision in the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or, in cases involving allegations of
discrimination, in the appropriate U.S. district court. The request must be filed within 60 days of
receipt of the Board's final decision.
In cases appealable to the Board that involve
allegations of discrimination the claimant may ask the EEOC to review the
Board's final decision on the discrimination issue. If the EEOC disagrees with the Board's decision on the
discrimination issue, the case is returned to the Board. If the Board does not adopt the EEOC
decision, then the case is referred to the Special Panel made up of a Chairman appointed
by the President, one member of the Board and one EEOC commissioner. The Special Panel issues the final decision
in the case, which then may be appealed to the appropriate U.S. district court.
Mixed Case complaints filed at the agency.
If an employee elects to file a mixed case complaint,
the agency must process the complaint in the same manner as it would any other
discrimination complaint, including use of the precomplaint process. If after the precomplaint stage has ended
and the complaint is accepted for processing as a formal complaint, the agency
(USDA-Office of Civil Rights) is obligated to:
1. advise the
complainant that if a final decision is not issued within one hundred and
twenty days of the date of acceptance of the complaint, the complainant may
appeal the matter to the MSPB at anytime thereafter, as specified in 5 CFR
1201.154(a), or may file a civil action as specified in section 1614.310(g),
but not both;
2. notify the
complainant that if (s)he is dissatisfied with the agency's final decision on
the mixed case complaint, (s)he may appeal the matter to the MSPB (not the
EEOC) within thirty (30) days of receipt of the agency's final decision; and,
3. advise
thecomplainant of the right to appeal the matter to the MSPB (not EEOC) within
thirty (30) days of receipt of the notice, and/or the right to file a civil
action as provided in section 1614.310(a).
Whom to contact for information & to initiate the
process
Filing an Appeal Directly to the Board
An individual wishing to file an appeal directly to the MSPB should file the appeal
in writing with the Board or field office serving the area where their duty
station was located when the action was taken.
MSPB regional and field offices and the areas they service are listed in Exhibit 5)
Mixed Case Complaints Filed at the Agency
An individual wishing to file a mixed case complaint
with the Agency should contact an EEO Counselor at their designated Employment
Complaints Process Service Center (see ECP section of this Guide), within 45
days of the alleged discriminatory appealable matter for 30 days of informal
counseling.
Roles of Responsible Parties
Appellant - Initiates a timely appeal with the MSPB
clearly stating the action being appealed, any violations being raised, the
relief being sought, and if represented, the designation of whom that
representative is to the MSPB and the Agency.
Notifies the Agency if the ADR option is elected and resulting extension
is requested.
If pursuing a mixed
case complaint, complainant must initiate contact with EEO counselor within 45
days of when the alleged discriminatory appealable matter occurred.
Agency
Representative: Represents the agency in discussions with
appellant and administrative judge, acting as the legal advocate during the
appeal process, and collaborating with management on ADR and resolution. Must make contact with EIP manager to
discuss ADR.
Deciding
Official - Makes the
decision, which resulted in the appealable action. Also makes determinations on offers of resolution. Ensures that agency has provided employee
with MSPB appeal form and MSPB regulations at the time an appealable action is
taken.
Employee's
Representative - This
person could be a Forest Service employee, or may be an outside party such as
an attorney. The appellant may also
choose to represent himself/herself.
Designation must be in writing by the appellant.
EEO Counselor - Offers complainant the ADR option.
Coordinates with EIP Manager and HR
Employee Relations Specialist on mixed case complaints. Conducts 30 days of informal counseling.
Issues right to file formal complaint where
appropriate. Where an aggrieved person
files an MSPB appeal on a mixed case complaint, and seeks timely informal
counseling, counseling may continue at the option of the parties as specified
in regulations. The agency must
terminate counseling and all efforts under the EEO process, with the issuance
of the notice of right to file a formal complaint.
The Counselor will advise the complainant of
their right to elect the forum in which the matter will be handled and advise
the complainant that whichever avenue is used first will be considered their
election of forum.
USDA-Office of Civil Rights - Must inform the complainant that if a final decision
is not issued within 120 days of the date of filing the mixed case complaint,
the complainant may appeal the matter to the MSPB at anytime thereafter. Notifies the complainant that if they are
dissatisfied with the agency's final decision on the mixed case complaint, they
may appeal the matter to the MSPB (not EEOC) within thirty (30) days of receipt
of the agency's final decision. Advises
the complainant of their right to appeal the Agency's final decision on a mixed
case complaint to the MSPB (not EEOC) within (30) days of receipt of the
notice, and/or the right to file a civil action.
· Decision
points for each party built into the process
The appellant can decide at any time when faced with
the prospect of an agency action being taken against him/her, or after an
action is taken, whether to seek ADR through the Early Intervention Program. There is no guarantee that ADR will occur,
however, as it is a voluntary election on the part of the agency as well as the
employee. The employee must decide
whether to file an appeal with the Board, and if so, if he/she believes it to
be a mixed case, to contact an EEO Counselor.
The employee must decide whether to seek resolution prior to a hearing,
possibly by electing the ADR option, and finally, if it is a mixed case, he/she
must elect the forum in which to proceed.
The deciding official/agency representative must
decide whether to offer mediation (ADR) through the EIP, whether to seek
resolution prior to a hearing, and whether to pursue the agency's case through
an MSPB, and, if applicable, a Petition for Review.
· Settlement
guidelines and resources
An option for using
ADR to assist in mutually agreed to settlement efforts is now included in the
Board's regulations as noted above in the Timeframes section. The MSPB Administrative Judge may also
attempt to encourage use of ADR and settlement prior to a hearing.
EIP is available
for use in accordance with Forest Service Guidelines and applicable
Regional/Station/WO
program policies. In the area of
appealable actions, the use of
EIP must be
carefully evaluated.
Exhibit 5
MSPB
REGIONAL OFFICES
Atlanta Regional Office
401 W. Peachtree Street, N.W.
Suite 1050 Atlanta, GA 30308
(401)
730-2751
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, South
Carolina, and Tennessee
Central Regional Office
230 South Dearborn Street
Room 3100
Chicago, IL 60604
(312) 353-2923
Ill, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas City, Kansas, Kentucky,
Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin
Dallas Field Office
1100 Commerce Street
Room 6F20
Dallas, TX 75242
(214) 767-0555
Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas
Northeastern Regional Office
U.S. Customhouse, Room 501
Second & Chestnut Streets
Philadelphia, PA 19106
(215) 597-9960
Delaware, Maryland (except the counties of Montgomery
and Prince George's) New Jersey (except the counties of Bergen, Essex, Hudson,
and Union), Pennsylvania, and West Virginia
Boston
Field Office
99 Summer Street
Suite 1810
Boston, MA 02110
(617) 424-5700
Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
Rhode Island, and Vermont
New York Field Office
26 Federal Plaza
Room 3137A
New York, NY 10278
(212) 264 -9372
New Jersey ( counties of Bergen, Essex, Hudson, and
Union), New York, Puerto Rico, and Virgin, and all overseas areas not otherwise
covered.
Western Regional Office
250 Montgomery Street
Suite 400, 4th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415) 705-2935
California and Nevada
Denver Field Office
12567 W. Cedar Dr.
Suite 100
Lakewood, CO 80228
(303) 969-5101
Arizona, Colorado, Kansas (except Kansas City),
Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming
Seattle Field Office
915 Second Avenue
Room 1840
Seattle, WA 98174
(206) 220-7975
Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, and
Pacific overseas areas


EIP may be used to resolve potential appeals. If the 30 day
filing deadline can be extended to 60 days. Appeal to MSPB Regional office within 30 Days* (60 Days w/ ADR)
*




USDA-INSPECTOR
GENERAL HOTLINE COMPLAINT
Description
of the Current Process
· Purpose
and Use:
The USDA-Inspector
General Hotline Complaint Process provides a relatively fast and secure way for
individuals to report violations of law and regulations. Those using the Hotline are informed that
their complaint can be made anonymously or that they may request
confidentiality.
Statutory/regulatory/policy
basis:
Inspector General
Act of 1978, Public Law 95-452
· Who
can use
Employees of the
federal government
· What
can be called into the Inspector General Hotline?
Any matter having
to do with: criminal activity, conflict of interest, bribery, employee
misconduct, fraud (submission of false claims/statements), misuse of grant or
contract funds, mismanagement/waste of funds, and/or actions endangering the
public health or safety.
· What
comprises a Hotline complaint?
Those contacting
the Hotline are expected to provide as much detail of the law or regulation
violation as possible.
· Timeframes
associated with the process
There are no
specific timeframes for reporting violations of law and regulations. However, Forest Service Regulations require
employees to timely report what they know or have a reasonable basis to believe
are violations of law or regulations.
(See FSM 5320.42 - .43, FSM 5304.7, USDA-OHRM Personnel Bulletin 735-1,
Section 725-211)
· Whom
to contact for information & to initiate the process
Individuals may
either call the USDA Office of the Inspector General at 1-800-424-9121 or write
United States Department of Agriculture, Office of Inspector General, P.O. Box
23399, Washington, DC 20026-3399.
A Hotline Complaint
may be filed with the Inspector General (IG) or with Law Enforcement
&Investigations (LE&I) in the Washington Office, U.S. Forest
Service. The IG refers complaint to
LE&I - WO. The IG normally expects
the Forest Service to complete its investigation and report on follow up to be
taken within 90 days of case referral.
LE&I - WO
refers those complaints which contain allegations of employee misconduct to the
Washington Office - Human Resources Management (Labor-Management, Employee
Relations and Performance Branch) for review and initial assessment and
determination on the type and scope of the inquiry or investigation that is
warranted. Complaints alleging program
mismanagement not involving employee misconduct are referred to the appropriate
WO Deputy Chief areas for inquiry.
WO-HRM refers complaints for inquiry or
administrative investigation to certified Forest Service Misconduct
Investigators or FS contracted investigators.
Referrals are typically made to the FS Region or Station Human Resources
Management Director where the allegation arose.
Inquiries or
investigations are normally completed within 60 days, with Reports of
Investigations submitted to WO-HRM, along with Region or Station HR Director
recommendations regarding administrative action that may be warranted. HRM reviews the Report of Investigation (ROI).
If WO-HRM concurs with the Region or Station HR recommendations , the
ROI and HRM Director's recommendation to close out complaint are sent to WO-LE&I. If further information or action is
necessary, the Region or Station is notified and instructed to provide it.
Complaint remains
open if administrative action is pending, until such action is complete. Once the
complaint is closed out, the
investigating Region or Station notifies subject of complaint.
· Decision
points for each party built into the process
There are no points
of collaboration on consultation so this process does not lend itself well to
ADR. ADR (EIP) could conceivably play a
role in addressing any conflict that surfaces or is uncovered as a result of
the investigation or factfinding. ADR
could be used by an employee against whom disciplinary action is taken as a
result of an investigation, in conjunction with resolving a grievance, appeal
or complaint they might initiate.
![]()




Whistleblower
Complaints
filed with the
U.S. Office of the Special Counsel (OSC)
Description
of the Current Process
· Purpose
and Use:
The Whistleblower
process provides a means for employees to safely report any violation of law,
rule or regulation to a body that is outside the USDA.
Statutory/regulatory/policy
basis:
1. Civil Service Reform Act of 1978
2. P.L. 95-454 (5 USC 3324, 5 USC 7321, 5 USC 552, 5 USC 1207 and 1208)
3. Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 and as
amended in 1990 PL 101-12, (5 CFR Chapter II 1209 and 5 CFR Part 1201), and the
Hatch Act
4. Office of Special Counsel (5 USC 1212(e), 5 CFR
1800)
5. Prohibited Personnel Practices (P.L. 95-454
Title I Section 101 and 5 USC 2302).
· Who
can use
Any employee,
former employee, and applicant for employment can use the Whistleblower
process.
· What
information can be disclosed in a Whistleblower Complaint
This process
applies to any alleged violation of law (including Prohibited Personnel
Practices and Hatch Act violations), rule, or regulation; gross mismanagement;
gross waste of funds, abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger
to public health or safety.
· What
comprises a Whistleblower Complaint?
Disclosure of any of the items listed in the
above information section.
· Timeframes
associated with the process
There are no
defined timeframes when filing a disclosure Whistleblower Complaint. On filing a Whistleblower appeal of actions
directly appealable to the Merit Systems Protection Board, the timeframes are
the same as filing directly with the Board, i.e. 30 days.
· Whom
to Contact for Information and to Initiate Process
Office of the
Special Counsel 1-800-872-9855, or
write to them at the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, 1730 M Street, N.W. Suite
300, Washington, D.C. 20036-4505.
· Roles
of responsible parties
Office of
Special Counsel - receives information and determines if
further inquiry is warranted,
investigates and
prosecutes allegations of Prohibited
Personnel Practice, seeks corrective action or may seek disciplinary action
from and through the Merit Systems Protection Board, and issues written decisions and written notice
to whistleblowers.
Agency Head - receives information and must conduct investigation on disclosure
items. Agency must also take
appropriate action on information received in investigation.
· Settlement
guidelines and resources
Information
discovered during investigations could result in disciplinary action. ADR may be used by an employee against whom
disciplinary action is taken as a result of an agency investigation, in
conjunction with resolving a grievance, appeal, or complaint they initiate.