Pmp management usc8/11/2023 ![]() ![]() It is very important that the agency put the employee on notice of which law is being used – and for which charges – prior to taking the action, as it usually cannot later re-characterize an action into one taken under a different law and MSPB has been told it cannot do so for the agency. However, agencies are permitted to take a performance-based action under either statute, provided they comply with the process for the chapter they select. ![]() This choice of chapters may be confusing for laypeople, as chapter 75 is typically thought of in the context of misconduct, since that is the section of the statute for misconduct-based actions. § 7513 (which can be used for performance or conduct that harms the efficiency of the service). § 4303 (which can only be used for failure in a critical performance element) and (2) 5 U.S.C. There are two different statutes that authorize an agency to demote or remove an employee for performance-based reasons: (1) 5 U.S.C. ![]() Performance-Based Actions under Chapters 43 and 75 of Title 5 – Similarities and Differences Implementing or Challenging Initial Decisions.Why Federal Employees Have the Right to a Hearing.Identifying Probationers and Their Rights.Agency Officials' Substantive and Procedural Errors and How to Fix Them.Avoid Facilitating Prohibited Personnel Practices (PPPs).How Employees Become Similarly Situated for Purposes of an Adverse Action Penalty.Labels are Not Required, but if Used They Must be Proven.Connecting the Job and the Offense ("Nexus").Decision-Maker Must Listen and Have Power to Decide.Legal Sources for the Right to Notice and a Meaningful Opportunity to Reply.Different Types of Adverse Actions Use Different Rules.Performance-Based Actions under Chapters 43 and 75 of Title 5 - Similarities and Differences.The Adverse Action Process - A Flowchart. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |