The MSPB held that it was bound by the decision on the U.S. of Defense, 2013 MSPB 78 (September 30, 2013), the MSPB affirmed the initial decision of an administrative judge, which had sustained an agency’s decision to demote Ingram.
MSPB Applies Ruling Limiting Appeal Rights Survivor annuity payments are paid to the surviving spouse of a federal employee where the surviving spouse was married to the employee when he or she died. 2012-3061.In the MSPB’s decision, appellant Kathryn King was ordered to reimburse OPM for $41,939.13 she had received in survivor annuity funds she received after filing an application with OPM for the funds and claiming to be the lawful widow of deceased U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Docket No. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Merit Systems Protection Board’s denial of a waiver of recovery of overpayment of survivor annuity benefits in King v. The EEOC rejected the agency’s arguments on appeal that the AJ’s credibility determinations were erroneous and that the AJ substituted her judgment for the supervisor’s judgment. The AJ noted that the workload of male attorneys was considerably lighter than that of the older females, the work performed by the male employees was not harshly criticized by the supervisor, and males were allowed to disagree with the supervisor in meetings while the complainants were not. The AJ found that the supervisor made derogatory remarks and demeaned the complainants, denied requests by the complainants for reassignment of their cases when they were overloaded, and more harshly criticized the work completed by the complainants. The EEOC AJ found that the supervisor treated the male employees and younger female employees more favorably with respect to work assignments, the ability to express their opinions regarding their work assignments, due dates imposed on them for completing assignments, and the manner in which the supervisor treated them. Meachum and Abbott, GS-14 attorneys, alleged that their supervisor subjected them to a hostile work environment and disparate treatment.
0720120003 (September 9, 2013), the EEOC found that the findings of an administrative judge, that the complainants had been subjected to discrimination and harassment on the bases of their sex and age, were supported by substantial evidence. Social Security Administration, EEOC Appeal No.
0 kommentar(er)
