Alleging misconduct in the absence of an underlying violation is an impermissible use of the disciplinary process under the CSRs. Such a practice fails to notify an employee what conduct the Agency considered in assessing discipline, thus depriving the employee of the opportunity to defend against the allegation. In re Leslie, CSA 10-11, 20 (12/5/11).
A separate penalty hearing is appropriate to complete a de novo determination on the appropriateness of the agency’s termination of appellant, where it established that he violated three out of ten rules asserted in the disciplinary letter, inexplicably gave substantially different penalties to the participants in the incident, and failed to read twenty witness statements asserting that appellant was not the aggressor in the incident, and he had no previous disciplinary history. In re Cotton, CSA 104-09, 13 (10/18/10).
CSR 19-10 [now 19-20] lists the types of matters that may be appealed and is jurisdictional. If the action appealed is not one of the subjects listed within the CSR, or the remedy sought is not one that the Hearing Officer has authority to grant, the Hearing Officer has no authority to consider the appeal. In re Valdez, CSA 96-06 (Order 11/16/06).
The 2006 amendments to the CSRs make it clear that an applicant may no longer appeal a disqualification decision made by the personnel director or his designee. In re Connors, CSA 35-06, 3 (Order 8/9/06).
CSR 19-10 A [now 19-20] provides no basis for a direct appeal of the amount of accrued vacation leave and compensatory time determined by the city auditor. In re Lovin, CSA 27-06 (Order 5/18/06); CSR 14-51.
A direct appeal under CSR 19-10 [now 19-20] may be taken to challenge the acts of an appointing authority only. In re Lovin, CSA 27-06 (Order 5/18/06).
Due Process is not denied in denying jurisdiction over the amount of accrued vacation and compensatory time due to former employee, as Hearing Office is not a court of general jurisdiction, hearing only such actions as defined by the rules under which it operates. In re Lovin, CSA 27-06 (Order 5/18/06).
While an individual may grieve any performance rating, only those matters that negatively affect pay, benefits, or status may be appealed if a grievance is denied. In re Stenke, CSA 14-06, 1 (Order 3/15/06); CSRs 13-50 A and 18-40 E.4.
Challenge to legality of background check question is not properly before Hearing Officer on appeal when appellant answered the question without objection, and did not assert a discrimination claim in the appeal. In re Mitchell, CSA 05-05, 8 (6/27/05).