Dewey's FREE MONTHLY "News and Case Alert" keeps you up-to-date with the latest federal sector employment and labor laws, cases and news.

EEOC to Title Cases With Randomly Generated Names

A couple years ago, EEOC switched from titling its case decision from the traditional use of the complainant's name to use for all cases of the word "complainant," making it impossible to recall and research significant cases using anything other than a docket number (viz: "Oh yes, do you recall the holding in 0120156755?"). According to a Commission announcement of October 5, 2015, EEOC will now use randomly generated cases names involving a first name and last initial, as in Suzie Q. v. Postmaster General. Dewey would prefer randomly selected rock band names, leading off with "Question Mark and the Mysterians," but Dewey was not consulted on what could have been a more entertaining approach to case law. Why all this concern about case names? Many cases involve events that are of great personal concern but of a private nature, and complainants would prefer to retain their anonymity. There is also the problem of employers using computer searches to determine whether job applicants have been involved in past employment litigation-a form of reprisal.

The Federal Circuit Affirms MSPB Furlough Economic Analysis

Many furlough appeals (why were they not all moot, anyway, since the appellants were paid for the furlough time?) involve arguments that no financial interest was served by the furlough of a particular appellant-particularly if the appellant worked in an agency subunit with independent funding. The Board determined that finances could be determined top-down in agencies rather than on the basis of an employee-by-employee analysis. That approach was ratified by in Einboden v. Dept. of Navy, an October 1, 2015, decision of the Federal Circuit declaring that "it is not our role to second guess agency decisions as to how to prioritize funding when faced with a budget shortfall."

Labor Contracts Have Life After Death

The federal sector rule has long been that provisions of a labor contract continue in effect following the contract's expiration unless the provisions involve permissive subjects of bargaining or are changed through negotiations. The rule was applied to grievance and arbitration articles in Independent Union of Pension Employees for Democracy and Justice and PBGC, 68 FLRA 999 (Sept. 29, 2015). The contract between a union that was decertified and the agency expired, but the agency was able to pursue against the new union a grievance under the expired contract.