Department of lethargy

WHAT HEELS: It may actually take less time to exhaust all legal appeals to prevent the execution of a death row inmate than it does to exhaust all administrative appeals to fire a federal employee. Neither the Department of Energy – which dragged this case on for years – nor an employee who refuses to accept that he is not wanted – comes out looking good.  

 

Stephen Patrick was a nuclear courier for the National Nuclear Security Administration who successfully appealed a suspension for the minor infraction of misusing a government car and has spent three of the last four years “paid to sit at home or sit at a desk doing nothing” while his bosses at the Department of Energy debate whether and how to fire him. The Washington Post describes the saga as “dizzying accusations, counteraccusations, memos and appeals”:

 

His certification to guard nuclear materials was revoked pending a review – making it impossible for Patrick to work as a courier.

 

A slew of psychological evaluations came next, with one contradicting the next, records show. His supervisors called him a difficult employee who had not shown remorse for misusing the car.

 

He took his case to an appeals board in the agency – and was suspended indefinitely following agency policy. …

 

His supervisors offered him $250,000 to drop his appeal and quit, according to Patrick and lawyers in the case. He refused. …

 

On his day in administrative court, Patrick’s supervisors said he had trouble dealing with stress, was arrogant and should not keep his job. But the hearing officer found “insufficient evidence” to support those claims and said he should be reinstated. …

 

Patrick’s bosses interpreted the ruling to mean he had to start at square one and re-apply for certification. For five months, he collected a paycheck while he waited for his paperwork to clear. …

 

In August, Associate Special Counsel William E. Reukauf concluded that Patrick’s “lengthy indefinite suspensions” were a violation of federal personnel rules.

 

Reukauf wrote, “Rarely would an employee have the stamina or perseverance … to endure 13 months without pay, prevail on the merits and then endure again a potentially endless cycle of recertification, denial and indefinite suspension.”

 

Patrick’s next hearing is scheduled for October 31st.

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
  • No comments exist for this post.
Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Name (required)

 Email (will not be published) (required)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.