The C4C Federal Exchange Newsletter (December 2014) by C4C FED

THE C4C FEDERAL EXCHANGE 1

THE COALITION FOR CHANGE, INC. (C4C) MONTHLY NEWSLETTER Volume 01 / No.2 December 2014

ISSN 2375-706X

DEDICATION: C4C dedicates the December edition of The C4C Federal Exchange to Michael Brown of Ferguson Missouri, Eric Garner of New York and other Black American males who have been the fatal victims of excessive force by law enforcement officers.

FERGUSON: A Pain Too Deep A Federal Employee Perspective

INSIDE THIS ISSUE: PROFILE OF COURAGE: Veteran Ralph Saunders

FEDERAL FOCUS: U.S. Department of Agriculture

VIDEO: Blowing The Whistle On Customs Border Protection

VIDEO: CONGRESS EXAMINES THE TREATMENT OF WHISTLEBLOWERS

.... FORMER CENSUS EMPLOYEE FILES

$6.53 MILLIONofDOLLAR TORTS CLAIM(OSC) 4 The Office Special Counsel may

request any member of the

Merit Systems

NINE (9) REASONS Protection BoardWHY to order a stay of any AGENCIES DISMISS COMPLAINTS 6

personnel action for 45days if OSC determines that there are reasonable grounds to believe VIDEO: C4C MEMBERS ADDRESS that the WORKPLACE personnel action was taken, 7or is to be HOSTILE CULTURE taken, as a result of a prohibited personnel practice. See 5 U.S.C. § 1214(b)(1)(A)(i) Investigation of prohibited personnel practices; corrective action. Special Counsel Ex Rel Coleen Elmers v Dept. of Veterans Affairs Docket Number CB1208-15-0007-U-1 December 1, 2014

Tanya Ward Jordan, Founder - C4C The failure of a grand jury to indict Darren Wilson, the white police officer who gunned down Michael Brown, a black unarmed teen in Ferguson, Missouri draws anguish, anger and agony from many Black Americans like myself. And, as if the Ferguson judicial blow wasn’t devastating enough . . . then comes the unfathomable news. A Staten Island grand jury permits a white police officer (Daniel Pantaleo) to escape accountability in the chokehold death of Eric Garner. The grand jury deciding the white officer’s fate turned a blind eye to witness accounts and video footage showing how the officer used a “banned” chokehold move to snuff the life out of a Black American male gasping repeatedly – “I can’t breathe.” Within the federal government, Black Americans routinely face flagrant injustices. Quite often, the abusers (public officials holding a wide variety of jobs including agents, prison guards, firefighters, and U.S. Marshals) receive no punishment. They are let off the hook in much of the same way the killers of

2 Eric Garner and Michael Brown were freed. No accountability. No justice. Hence, the untimely and wrongful death of Garner and Brown by the overzealous hands of police officers using excessive force, summons an internal pain almost too great to put into words. For I am, like other C4C members, a victim of abuse by a federal official who never faced discipline. Black federal employees, who report internal workplace violations of the Civil Rights Act (CRA) of 1964 receive little, if any, protection from abusers. In fact, the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ), the premier law enforcement agency many hope will conduct a fair criminal investigation of the Ferguson matter, is the very department that defends federal managers who abuse Black American employees and applicants should they dare to raise discrimination claims. Few citizens beyond the Nation’s capital know of DoJ’s role to shield “federal officials,” who are named as discriminating officials in Equal Employment Opportunity complaints, should the employee later file a resulting lawsuit in federal court. In fact, the DoJ’s Assistant United States Attorneys (AUSA) operate much like the prosecutor in Ferguson. That is, the AUSA’s goal is to bury the claim; not root out the cause. For this reason, AUSA’s spend much time and taxpayer’s dollars vigorously seeking ways to “dismiss lawsuits,” particularly those that might reflect badly on a federal agency. In the federal employment arena, DOJ uses its legal saavy to insulate civil rights violators from facing jury trials. They routinely file “motion for dismissals” or “motions for summary judgment” when responding to a plaintiff’s race based lawsuit against the government. In the federal sector, Darren Wilson-types, are those who “kill” without penalty. In the federal sector, abusers often kill the financial, emotional, pyschological and physical wellbeing of Black Americans. In some cases, deaths have resulted due to the stress imposed from being left in a hostile federal workplace.

“The C4C Federal Exchange Newsletter

TITLE VII: PROFILE OF COURAGE A Salute to Ralph Saunders, Federal Whistleblower

Ralph Saunders

Former US Marine Corps veteran, Ralph Saunders once worked at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) at the New Orleans Medical Center. He worked for the federal government for 21 years. During his employment at the VA, racism and reprisal was so pervasive he had to file seven Equal Employment Opportunity actions: five (5) complaints and two (2) appeals. The actions were filed against the VA during his last three years of employment after a Cassandra Holiday, a proven discriminating official, became his supervisor. Veteran Saunders is one of many who was put on a “BLACKLIST” and targeted for removal after exposing civil rights violations at VA. Saunders was unlawfully charged with absent without leave, leave without pay, denied sick leave and ultimately removed from federal service as a result of his disclosure. Saunders won his last case against the VA in 2004. The EEOC found Cassandra Holiday, Jeanette Butler, and Linda Cosey guilty of “abusing the rules” in the Saunders “BLACKLISTING case: No. 200L-0629-2004100828 Saunders awaits a decision from the EEOC re: Breach of Settlement Agreement.

Vo. 1, No. 2, December 2014

3 The DoJ’s taxpayer funded counsel to bigoted managers fosters a culture that allows nepotism, sexism racism and reprisal to pervade the federal sector. Since the tragic “hands-up shooting” in Ferguson and the illegal “chokehold” homicide in New York, men and women of all colors across the nation now chant – “Black Lives Matter.” C4C members, who have long sought to expose such egregiousness as the blacklisting of veteran employees by U.S. Veterans Administration officials, the denial of farm loans to Black farmers by U.S. Department of Agriculture officials and the reprisal against Black U.S. Marshals by DoJ law enforcement personnel, have longed asserted – Black Lives Matter. While some view the DoJ as if the calvary ready to right the Ferguson wrong, C4C members do not hold such fanciful notions. David Grogan, a retired supervisory Deputy United States Marshal and C4C member, has described a “combat zone” culture within the DoJ workplace. Moreover, the DoJ was of no help to the African American woman, a federal employee, who received death threats including a slashed up Aunt Jemima doll drenched in simulated blood while working at the U.S. Army Ft. Belvoir installation. The perpetrator of various hateful acts was never caught or brought to justice. Instead, the employee (the victim) was fired after the agency refused to provide reasonable accommodations to the Black American female who feared for her safety on an U.S. Army installation. As a victim of discrimination, I am haunted by my past encounter with the DoJ, an agency that committedly defended those who stuck me in a storage room and subjected me to various forms of workplace abuse. Still, I am prayerful that the DoJ officials will operate with integrity to usher in the fairness which was sorely lacking in the Brown and Garner cases. Circa 2008, I settled my race-based employment claims against the Department of Commerce. I recall sitting in the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia across the table from a cheeky DoJ attorney. The DoJ attorney, who represented my employer (defendant) sat “The C4C Federal Exchange Newsletter

chuckling in my face and in the face of my colleagues, who sought to expose wide-spread race discrimination at the U.S. Department of Commerce (Janet Howard, et. al. v Pritzker) Fast forward to 2014. The same DoJ attorney, now visibly older and more hardened, advances schemes to undermine Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The DoJ AUSA has raised new arguments, never introduced before, to silence the longstanding claims of Janet Howard, who once successfully proved discrimination against Commerce officials in the late 80’s and who filed the pending matter in 1994, some twenty (20) years ago. The Justice Department also fought roughly 25 years to smother the legitimate race based claims of Matthew Fogg, an African-American male, who was once employed by the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) as a deputy U.S. Marshal. In this case, Fogg won a landmark verdict against the DoJ proving racial discrimination against USMS. (Case 1:94-cv02814-JAR). Presently, two other employment race-based class actions are in play against the DoJ’s USMS (Fogg v Holder, and Brewer v Holder) See article. US Marshals Can't Use Dukes To Nix Bias Suit In closing, the failure to hold anyone accountable for the wrongful death of Michael Brown or Eric Garner serves as a painful reminder to C4C members that fifty years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Black lives don’t matter enough for the U.S. Department of Justice to rectify how to expeditiously and judiciously root out inequality whether it is present in the streets of Ferguson or within the corridors of the federal government. C4C members comprise present and former federal employees who have been injured due to unchecked race discrimination and reprisal occurring in the federal employment.

Vo. 1, No. 2, December 2014

U.S. Department of Agriculture

that the USDA has been and continues to be involved in large civil rights lawsuits claiming discriminatory behavior on the part of USDA, including lawsuits brought by AfricanAmerican, Native American, Hispanic, and women farmers. Mr. Lawrence Lucas, President of the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees, states –“things have gotten worse than ever under the leadership of USDA’s Secretary, Thomas Vilsack.” NO FEAR Data as of 9/30/2014.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is a cabinet-level agency that oversees the American farming industry. USDA duties range from helping farmers with price support subsidies, to inspecting food to ensure the safety of the American public. Despite its notable mission, USDA has a deep rooted history of discrimination that earned the agency the label -- the Last American Plantation. The Public Broadcasting Service PBS website reports: “a 1964 study exposed how the USDA actively worked against the economic interests of black farmers. The USDA's loan agencies denied black farmers ownership and operating loans, disaster relief and other aid. One practice was to deny credit to any black farmer who assisted civil rights activists, joined the NAACP, registered to vote, or simply signed a petition.” A 2008 Government Accountability Office (GAO), report found that the USDA’s civil rights efforts were marked by “significant deficiencies.” The report found that USDA failed to track and adjudicate civil rights complaints and failed to provide accurate data regarding minority participation in USDA programs. A GAO 2012 report discloses how the USDA has for decades been the focus of federal inquiries into claims of discrimination against minorities and women both in the programs it administers and in its workforce. The GAO’s 2012 report asserts that the USDA implemented some of its 2008 recommendations; however, the report noted “The C4C Federal Exchange Newsletter

The USDA, with its workforce totaling 85,396 as of March 2014, submitted it’s NO FEAR data disclosing that (as of 9/30/14) reprisal, race and sex discrimination were the most common basis for complaint filings. Over a six (6) year period, 3,119 EEO complaints were filed by 2,889 complainants. The USDA reports it took on average 212 days to complete investigation thereby exceeding the 180 days for completing investigations of discrimination as prescribed by 29 CFR 1614.108 (f). The 2014 USDA Employee Viewpoint Survey USDA employees completed a survey that disclosed the following results for questions 33, 37 and 54 (where positive indicates agree or strongly agree; neutral indicates neither agree or disagree: negative disagree and strongly disagree) Q33. Pay raises depend on how well employees perform their jobs: 16.4 Positive; 27.1% Neutral; 56.4% Negative Q37. Arbitrary action, personal favoritism and coercion for partisan political purposes are Not tolerated: 53.84 Positive; 23.6% Neutral; 22.7% Negative Q54. My organization's senior leaders maintain High standards of honesty and integrity: 43.9 Positive; 30% Neutral; 26.1% Negative

Vo. 1, No. 2, December 2014

5 LEARN MORE ABOUT USDA: Congresswoman Speier Calls on USDA IG to Investigate Allegations of Sexual Harassment and Retaliation in Region 5 Forest Service, Nov. 20, 2014 Documentary: Last American Plantation http://thelastamericanplantation.om/short-film/

The VA Death Report According to U.S. Marine Corps veteran Oliver Mitchell, “thousands of orders for diagnostic medical tests were purged en masse by the Department of Veterans Affairs to make it appear as if decade-long backlog was being eliminated.” See Mitchell’s narrative “BLOG” entitled Veteran Whistleblower Story Exposing Corruption. “ALLEGED” DISCRIMINATING

OFFICIALS

James Tomscheck

Customs and Border Patrol Case HS-09-CBP-002184-00100

Michael Vrobel General Services Administration

Victoria Salmon, formerly with the SSA, unsuccessfully argued to the Federal Circuit that the Performance Assessment and Communications System (PACS), the performance appraisal system which governed her performance plan, was unlawful. She asserted the following three reasons: 1) PACS failed to adhere to Congress' requirement that performance appraisal systems be as objective as possible; 2) that her own performance standards did not meet the criteria for employee participation in their development; and 3) that PACS had not been legally approved by the Office of Personnel Management. Despite Salmon’s argument, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Merit Systems Protection Board decision upholding the Social Security Administration's removal of Salmon for deficient performance. NOTE: Performance-based removals or demotions, which are often wrongfully used to retaliate against employees who file EEO complaints, are difficult for employees to successfully challenge in appeals. Hence, when seeking relief federal employees should also concentrate on procedural errors when performance-based actions are proposed and/or taken against them.

Court of Appeals Upholds Lack of Jurisdiction: Outside the Scope of Duties

Case No. 12–5107

Linda JACOBS, Appellant v. Michael J. VROBEL, Appellee

CASE HIGHLIGHT

Linda Jacobs, an employee of the U.S. General

Performance Standards Upheld Salmon v. Social Security Administration, No. 2011-3029 (December 9, 2011), “The C4C Federal Exchange Newsletter

Services Administration, sued her supervisor, Michael Vrobel in the District of Columbia Superior Court for “defamation and interference with her attempts to secure alternative employment.” The United States Attorney General certified that Vrobel's conduct was within the scope of his employment, therefore transferring the case to “federal” district court and replacing the United States as the defendant. The district court concluded that Vrobel did in fact act within the scope of his employment and Vo. 1, No. 2, December 2014

6 dismissed the suit as jurisdictionally barred by the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). On appeal,

Jacobs argued that Vrobel's conduct was outside the scope of his employment. The Court of Appeals disagreed and affirmed the district court's dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Adverse Action

The African American Voice Newspaper was incorporated in November 1991. It is the longest running black monthly newspaper ever published in Colorado Springs. CLICK HERE.

MUST READ

In Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White, 126 S.Ct. 2405, 165 L.Ed.2d 345 (2006) The U.S. Supreme Court established that employees may challenge “materially adverse” job actions as retaliatory under Title VII. What is a materially adverse job action? According to the Court: “A plaintiff must show that . . . the challenged action . . . might have dissuaded a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination.”

Retaliation: How to Build and Prove A Case after Burlington Northern Maryland Employment Lawyers Association Click HERE

Organizational Corruption of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Claiming Discrimination: Cooperate KOCH v. WHITE No. 12-5139 The court first articulated the link between the complainant’s obligation to "cooperate" and the requirement that he exhaust his remedies: "A plaintiff’s suit will be barred for failure to exhaust administrative remedies’ if he forces an agency to dismiss or cancel the complaint by failing to provide sufficient information to enable the agency to investigate the claim." Because the SEC made clear to Koch that it needed his testimony and his medical records, and Koch refused to provide either, he failed to provide the minimum information necessary for the investigation to proceed. (Decided March 7, 2014).

“The C4C Federal Exchange Newsletter

Commission

(September 1, 2014)

Robert Stanton Martin Click HERE

A QUOTE FROM . . . — Dr. David Michaels Assistant, Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health

Making a living shouldn't have to cost you your life. Workplace fatalities, injuries, and illnesses are preventable. Safe jobs happen because employers make the choice to fulfill their responsibilities and protect their workers.

Vo. 1, No. 2, December 2014

7 SHARING THE WORD C4C’s Greetings Chair ~Terri L. Williams

CALL TO ACTION PETITION: Require Police to Report the Number of People They Kill or Injure PETITION: Justice for Eric Garner: Fire Officer Daniel Pantaleo

Greetings C4C Family! Here’s the Season for Rejoicing! Let Us Celebrate Each Day by FAITH!! Isaiah 9:6-7 (KJV) 6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. 7 Of

the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

BOYCOTT: In response to the inaction of corporate leaders to the Michael Brown killing (and other Black youth), Onus Inc. announces an economic boycott of: WalMart, Emerson Electric, Enterprise Rent A Car and more. LINK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIHi5upxxy0

WELLNESS WATCH Federal workplace fatalities rose last year even as the number of workplace deaths in the United States fell, according to Bureau of Labor statistics reported in an article by the Baltimore Sun entitled: Fatalities in federal workforce increased, statistics show. Fatal work injuries among government workers at all levels rose 5 percent to 476. But the federal workplace recorded a much sharper 19 percent increase in fatalities to 124. Read more.

May God Bless Us All, Terri ARTICLES Judge Not, That Ye Be Not Judged! The book review by Mr. Dennis Moore, a C4C member and Associate Editor for the East County Magazine in San Diego East County Magazine book provides insight into the publish book of Mary Elizabeth Bullock, former Administrative Judge with the EEOC. Book is entitled: Judging Me: One Woman’s

Journey From Abuse And Betrayal To Triumph (November 30, 2014).

“The C4C Federal Exchange Newsletter

Terminating Employees under FMLA According to Findlaw.com, an employer may terminate an employee on Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) status if a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for termination exists. Examples given by Findlaw.com include the following: “If an employee would have been fired regardless of FMLA leave because of poor

performance, then the employee may be terminated before, during or after FMLA leave. (Richmond v. Oneok); and if, prior to the leave, an employee fails to meet the goals of a corrective action program designed to improve performance, then the employee may be terminated upon return from FMLA leave.” Vo. 1, No. 2, December 2014

8 (Hubbard v. Blue Cross Blue Shield Assoc. (1998).” Read more at Findlaw.com.

damages, plus legal fees (J. Davidson, Aug. 26, 2010)

IN THE NEWS