Decisions
Merit Systems Protection Board
DS was the Director of Logistics at Schofield Barracks. As the Director of Logistics, DS was responsible to insure that the embarkation of troops and supplies bound for the Middle East took place. He was a devoted federal employee who saw his job as a mission in this country's war against terrorism.
Although DS worked long hours in carrying out his mission, he was also absent minded.
He prepared his time sheets at the end of each pay period, sometimes asking his secretary as to the time he reported for work. Such a practice almost led to his termination.
An anonymous complaint was made that DS was engaged in time card fraud. The Army assigned an investigator to conduct an investigation. That investigator put DS under surveillance, recording DS arrivals to work and his activities for his work day. However, the investigator did not verify when DS finished his work day and went home.
DS was charged with time card fraud and terminated. At the hearing of his appeal, the investigator admitted that he could not prove time card fraud in that he only clocked the time DS arrived at work and did not clock the time when DS left work for home.
DS prevailed in his removal hearing and was reinstated by the Army as ordered by the MSPB Judge.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
ND, an elderly African American woman, was a teacher employed by Department of Defense in its school located at Camp Zama, Japan. She was laid off by her principal who was required to lay off one teacher from Camp Zama High School because of a reduction in students.
ND was laid off from Camp Zama and was able to secure a teaching position with the DOD, first in England and then in Germany.
At her EEOC hearing conducted at Camp Zama, ND was successful in proving that her termination from Camp Zama high school was motivated by her age and her race. The EEOC judge ordered that Department of Defense reimburse ND for her attorney's fees, pay her compensatory damages for her pain and suffering, and be returned to Camp Zama, Japan from her assignment in Germany.
Whistleblowing
JT was the secretary to both the Kauai Police Chief and the Kauai Police Commission. When the Police Commission sought to impose disciplinary action upon the police chief for his alleged abuse of his duties, JT was required to do administrative work in support of the Kauai Police Commission against the Kauai Police Chief, who had been suspended by the Kauai Police Commission.
After the Police Chief had been disciplined and restored to duty, he removed JT for disloyalty. JT sued the Police Chief and the County of Kauai for violation of her rights under Hawaii Whistle blowing law in that she was a participate to an official investigation of possible violations of State law.
The trial court dismissed JT lawsuit holding that she was not protected by Hawaii’s Whistleblowing law; the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the trial court finding that JT was protected by Hawaii's Whistleblowing law. After remand, JT settled her claim with the Kauai Police Chief and the County of Kauai.
This is an unpublished case and is not to be cited as precedent.
Whistleblowing
GM was a nurse employed at Leahi hospital, which is a State hospital for elderly disabled persons. While on duty she reported that nurses were sleeping for over an hour on their breaks in violation of hospital rules.
As a result of this Whistleblowing activity, GM was accused of patient abuse by some of her co-workers; she was suspended by her supervisor and ordered by the Hospital Director to be on administrative leave pending the investigation of the accusation of patient abuse. The charge of patient abuse was sustained by a fact finding panel but was reversed by the personnel director of the hospital.
GM sued her co-workers of defamation and conspiracy; she also sued her supervisor under the Hawaii Whistleblowing Law and the hospital director for violating her 1st Amendment Rights of Free Speech.
Before submitting the case to the jury, the trial court dismissed GM 's claims of First Amendment violations and violations of Hawaii's Whistleblowing law as against her supervisor and the hospital director.
The jury found in favor of GM against her co-workers for defamation in falsely accusing her of patient abuse.
On appeal, the Hawaii Supreme Court sustained the defamation verdicts against GM 's co-workers, affirmed the dismissal of the hospital director, but reversed the claim of Whistleblowing violation against GM 's supervisor. The Supreme Court further reversed an award of attorney's fees awarded to the hospital issued against GM for the dismissal of her claims against the hospital director.
On remand, GM settled her case with the State of Hawaii in a confidential settlement agreement.
This is an unpublished case and is not to be cited as precedent.
