Tag Archive for: Ask FELTG

November 29, 2021

Unfortunately, there is a bit of skepticism in the workplace about Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), as demonstrated by this question received in a recent class taught by FELTG Instructor Shana Palmieri, LCSW.

PTSD is classified as an anxiety disorder that changes the body’s reaction to stress, affecting stress hormones and specific parts of the brain. It’s much more than an individual’s reaction to fireworks and other loud noises. “The interactions that trigger PTSD symptoms can be subtle and difficult to understand for individuals who have not had the experience themselves,” Shana explained.

Some potential manifestations could be avoidance of trauma-related stimuli, exaggerated self-blame, social isolation, difficulty connecting with others, irritability, difficulty sleeping, fatigue, and difficulty concentrating.

A quick recap of the reasonable accommodation process: The employee making the accommodation request must show that he is a qualified individual with a disability, and needs an accommodation in order to successfully perform the essential functions of the job. From there, the agency is required to accommodate the employee unless doing so would cause an undue hardship, or no accommodation is available.

Just because the employee’s symptoms don’t mirror your perceptions of PTSD doesn’t mean they’re not real. Follow your agency’s reasonable accommodation protocol and engage in the interactive process with the employee. The specific reasonable accommodation will depend on the employee’s symptoms, but could include a modified work schedule, telework, increased privacy in the workplace, apps for anxiety and stress, or a white noise machine, just to name a few.

For more detailed information on PTSD and other employee mental health challenges, join Shana on December 9 from 1-3 pm ET as she teaches Managing Employee Mental Health Challenges During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic. See below for more details on the program.

Have a question? Ask FELTG.

The information presented here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. Contacting FELTG in any way/format does not create the existence of an attorney-client relationship. If you need legal advice, you should contact an attorney.

September 28, 2021

In this hypothetical question posed by a FELTG reader, a bargaining unit employee (Employee A) reported that a non-bargaining unit employee (Employee B) told another non-bargaining unit employee (Employee C) that their mutual supervisor said Employee C was “attractive.”

The FELTG reader said that such a conversation never took place and considered it slander against the supervisor. And based on recent interactions, it appears that this “slander” made it out to the rest of the staff.

The questioner wrote:

Given the gravity of the misconduct, and the ripple effect it could cause, and may have already started (sexual harassment complaints, lowered morale, strain on working relationships, damage to supervisor’s career) would a suspension be recommended, and a letter of reprimand? What if Employee B is also facing a Letter of Counseling for other inappropriate comments to other employees?

In FELTG training, you stated that a suspension is not a deterrent to misconduct, and that GAO supports this. Given that there are two victims and other affected parties in this hypothetical scenario, what would be the recommended penalty?

There is a lot going on here, and as a training company we can’t give legal advice to this specific scenario. We’d suggest that the supervisor contact the Labor/Employee Relations specialist or an OGC attorney to work through the problem. However, we can speak to the principle in general.

If an agency supervisor is considering discipline for Employee B’s conduct, then there would need to be some type of inquiry or investigation so the agency could determine whether there was a preponderance of the evidence that the employee violated a workplace rule or expectation. [Editor’s note: Perhaps the most challenging investigations involve harassment claims. Join FELTG President Deborah Hopkins and FELTG Instructor Katherine Atkinson for Conducting Effective Harassment Investigations October 4-6. Classes run from 12:30 pm – 4 pm ET each day.]

Evidence could be from personal observation, copies of emails from people complaining about the rumors, statements from other people who were told the rumor, video recordings, or things like that. The evidence gathered during the inquiry will also help the supervisor determine the appropriate penalty using the Douglas factors.

The penalty factors need to be considered independently for this employee and this act of misconduct, and OPM regulations say that the proposing and deciding officials are responsible for proposing and ultimately determining the appropriate penalty. There is not one firm answer we can give, such as “a reprimand is too weak” or “a removal would be justified” because we are not privy to the Douglas factors in this employee’s case. However, supervisors get broad discretion to determine what is appropriate based on the factors such as the nature of the offense, the employee’s performance, trust and confidence in the employee, and more.

The bottom line: Whatever penalty the proposing (and ultimately deciding) official deems appropriate, and can justify through the Douglas factors, should be legally defensible. We have seen other cases involving similar misconduct where agencies have chosen to reprimand, or suspend, or remove – and the entire range has been upheld based on the penalty factor justification.

Have a question? Ask FELTG.

The information presented here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. Contacting FELTG in any way/format does not create the existence of an attorney-client relationship. If you need legal advice, you should contact an attorney.

June 29, 2021

Even as masks come off and life appears closer to normal, there is still a lot of concern about the spread of coronavirus, especially with the identification of new variants. A recent outbreak in a state government office in Manatee County, Fla., left two employees dead and several hospitalized.

The current White House stance is that “generally” Federal employees are not required to be vaccinated against COVID-19. So, we understand your unease with employees who show symptoms of the virus, and the potential impact on employees who are not vaccinated.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) requires healthcare facilities to ensure the protection of patient’s medical data. HIPAA is not applicable in this situation.

The Americans with Disabilities Act requires that employers keep all medical information about employees confidential, even information that’s not about a disability. The CDC addressed a similar question in its most recent guidance, and provided the following answer:

“Clearly, the information that an employee has symptoms of, or a diagnosis of, COVID-19, is medical information. But the fact that this is medical information does not prevent the manager from reporting to appropriate employer officials so that they can take actions consistent with guidance from the CDC and other public health authorities.

The question is what information to report: is it the fact that an employee—unnamed—has symptoms of COVID-19 or a diagnosis, or is it the identity of that employee? Who in the organization needs to know the identity of the employee will depend on each workplace and why a specific official needs this information. Employers should make every effort to limit the number of people who get to know the name of the employee.”

For more information on this topic, join FELTG Instructor Katherine Atkinson for Vexing Vaccine Requirements: Responding to Requests for Exemptions and Reasonable Accommodations – a 75-minute webinar, starting at 1 pm ET on July 12. The webinar will answer questions regarding obligations to accommodate employees who are uncomfortable being in a workplace where not everyone will be vaccinated, and those who have underlying medical conditions that make them more susceptible to a severe infection. 

Do you have a Federal employment law-related question? Ask FELTG.

The information presented here is for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. Contacting FELTG in any way/format does not create the existence of an attorney-client relationship. If you need legal advice, you should contact an attorney.