Opinion

Taunya Jefferson v. Department of Labor

Court
Merit Systems Protection Board
Filed
May 22, 2015
Status
Unpublished
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

TAUNYA JEFFERSON, DOCKET NUMBER

Appellant, CB-7121-15-0010-V-1

v.

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, DATE: May 22, 2015

Agency.

THIS FINAL ORDER IS NO NPRECEDENTIAL 1

Eleanor J. Lauderdale, Esquire, Washington, D.C., for the appellant.

Candyce Phoenix, Washington, D.C., for the agency.

BEFORE

Susan Tsui Grundmann, Chairman

Mark A. Robbins, Member

FINAL ORDER

¶1 The appellant requests review of an arbitrator’s decision regarding her

removal. For the reasons set forth below, we DENY the request for review for

failure to meet the requirements of 5 C.F.R. § 1201.155(d).

¶2 The agency removed the appellant from her position as a Management Staff

Assistant with the agency’s Office of Unemployment Insurance for unacceptable

1

A nonprecedential order is one that the Board has determined does not add

sign ificantly to the body of MSPB case law. Parties may cite nonprecedential orders,

but such orders have no precedential value; the Board and administrative judges are not

required to follow or distinguish them in any future decisions. In contrast, a

precedential decision issued as an Opinion and Order has been identified by the Board

as significantly contributing to the Board’s case law. See 5 C.F.R. § 1201.117(c).

2

performance while on a performance improvement plan, and she challenged that

action through arbitration pursuant to the negotiated grievance procedure set forth

in her collective bargaining agreement. Request for Review (RFR) File, Tabs

1-2, 9 at 21. The appellant subsequently filed this request for Board review of the

arbitrator’s decision. RFR File, Tabs 1-2.

¶3 The Clerk of the Board issued a February 20, 2015 acknowledgment letter

in which he informed the appellant, in pertinent part, that the Board’s regulations

require that a request for review of an arbitration decision must contain: (1) a

statement of the grounds on which review is requested; (2) references to evidence

of record or rulings related to the issues before the Board; (3) arguments in

support of the stated grounds that refer specifically to relevant documents and

that include relevant citations of authority; and (4) legible copies of the final

grievance or arbitration decision, the agency decision to take the action, and other

relevant documents, which may include a transcript or tape recording of the

hearing. RFR, Tab 6; see 5 C.F.R. § 1201.155(d). The Clerk further explained

that, to the extent that the appellant had not yet complied with those

requirements, she may file a supplement to her request for review by March 2,

2015, and that the record would close upon the expiration of the period allotted

for the agency to file its response to the appellant’s request for review, April 6,

2015. RFR, Tab 6 at 1; see 5 C.F.R. § 1201.155(f). The appellant resubmitted a

corrected copy of her request for review, RFR, Tab 8, and the agency responded

in opposition to the appellant’s request, RFR, Tab 9.

¶4 After the record closed, the appellant requested leave to submit a copy of

the transcript. RFR, Tab 10. The agency responded in opposition, explaining

that, because the appellant failed to show that the transcript was not readily

available before the close of the record, she could not meet her burden in order to

file it after the record had closed. RFR, Tab 11 at 4-5; see 5 C.F.R. § 1201.155(f)

(“Once the record closes, no additional evidence or argument will be accepted

unless the party submitting it shows that the evidence was not readily available

3

before the record closed.”). The agency also asserted that the appellant’s request

for review was incomplete because she had failed to file a copy of the agency’s

decision removing her as required by 5 C.F.R. § 1201.155(d)(4). RFR, Tab 11 at

4-5. 2

¶5 Although the appellant, who is represented by counsel, provided a copy of

the arbitration decision and has explained the grounds on which she bases her

request, with apparent citations to the transcript of the arbitration proceedings and

to relevant authorities, RFR, Tab 4, she neglected to file the required copy of the

agency’s decision, or to even address her failure to do so in her subsequent

pleadings, see RFR, Tabs 10, 12. Because the Clerk of the Board correctly

articulated these requirements in its February 20, 2015 acknowledgment letter,

the appellant was on notice regarding the requirement for her to submit, among

other items, the agency’s decision. RFR File, Tab 5. Her failure to fully meet the

mandatory requirements of 5 C.F.R. § 1201.155(d) precludes the Board from

granting her request for review.

¶6 Moreover, even if she had complied with Board regulation and filed a copy

of the agency’s decision, the appellant’s failure to submit the transcript, 3 or

anything at all in support of the allegations set forth in her request for review,

2

The appellant subsequently submitted a request for an extension of time in which to

file a reply to the agency’s response in opposition to her request for review. RFR, Tab

12. The Clerk of the Board denied the appellant’s request because Board regulations do

not provide for the filing of a reply to a response to a request for review of an

arbitrator’s decision. RFR, Tab 13; see 5 C.F.R. § 1201.155.

3

The appellant’s request to supplement the record with a copy of the transcript

indicates that she had a copy of the transcript in her possession but that she chose not to

submit it when the record was still open because she did not have an electronic version

of it. RFR, Tab 10 at 4. However, the appellant could have timely submitted the hard

copy. Although the appellant’s representative registered as an e-filer, the appellant d id

not do so, and, in any event, the Board’s electronic filing regu lations do not require the

e-filing of any pleading, even for those who register as e-filers. See 5 C.F.R.

§ 1201.14(f). Because the appellant has failed to show that the transcript was

unavailab le, despite her due diligence, before the close of the record, we deny her

request to supplement the record with it. 5 C.F.R. § 1201.155(f).

4

leaves her unable to overcome the deference afforded the arbitrator’s factual

determinations. See, e.g., Weaver v. Social Security Administration, 94 M.S.P.R.

447, ¶ 13 (2003) (an arbitrator’s factual determinations are entitled to deference

unless he erred in his legal analysis, e.g., by misallocating burdens of proof or

employing the wrong analytical framework); Holly v. Department of Health &

Human Services, 92 M.S.P.R. 601, ¶ 10 (2002) (an appellant seeking review of an

arbitration decision has the burden of providing the Board with materials

necessary to support matters raised on review, including a transcript or tape

recording of the arbitration hearing); Higgs v. Social Security Administration,

71 M.S.P.R. 48, 51-52 (1996) (employee’s unsupported assertions that arbitrator

erred in her fact findings were insufficient to show that the arbitrator’s findings

conflicted with Board substantive law and thus did not provide a basis for setting

aside or modifying the arbitrator’s award where the record did not contain the

hearing transcript or exhibits).

NOTICE TO THE APPELLANT REGARDING

YOUR FURTHER REVIEW RIGHTS

You have the right to request further review of this final decision.

Discrimination Claims: Administrative Review

You may request review of this final decision on your discrimination

claims by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). See Title 5

of the United States Code, section 7702(b)(1) (5 U.S.C. § 7702(b)(1)). If you

submit your request by regular U.S. mail, the address of the EEOC is:

Office of Federal Operations

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, D.C. 20013

If you submit your request via commercial delivery or by a method

requiring a signature, it must be addressed to:

5

Office of Federal Operations

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

131 M Street, NE

Suite 5SW12G

Washington, D.C. 20507

You should send your request to EEOC no later than 30 calendar days after

your receipt of this order. If you have a representative in this case, and your

representative receives this order before you do, then you must file with EEOC no

later than 30 calendar days after receipt by your representative. If you choose to

file, be very careful to file on time.

Discrimination and Other Claims: Judicial Action

If you do not request EEOC to review this final decision on your

discrimination claims, you may file a civil action against the agency on both your

discrimination claims and your other claims in an appropriate United States

district court. See 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(2). You must file your civil action with

the district court no later than 30 calendar days after your receipt of this order. If

you have a representative in this case, and your representative receives this order

before you do, then you must file with the district court no later than 30 calendar

days after receipt by your representative. If you choose to file, be very careful to

file on time. If the action involves a claim of discrimination based on race, color,

religion, sex, national origin, or a disabling condition, you may be entitled to

representation by a court-appointed lawyer and to waiver of any requirement of

6

prepayment of fees, costs, or other security. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f) and

29 U.S.C. § 794a.

FOR THE BOARD: ______________________________

William D. Spencer

Clerk of the Board

Washington, D.C.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.