To Err Is Not Human for Demoted Postal Supervisor

March 3, 2008 by postal
Filed under: legal cases, postal supervisors 

Federal Court rules Postal Supervisor’s discipline for timekeeping error too harsh

Here are facts taken from the recent case:

In January of 2005, Judy Texeira was supervisor of five window clerks and several floor clerks, and she was also finance supervisor at the Modesto Main Post Office. She had been a supervisor for about seven years, a postal employee for about nineteen years, and had no prior record of misconduct.

On January 26, however, Texeira incorrectly posted 160 hours of annual leave for an employee she was supervising. The employee had not yet earned the leave, never earned it, and later returned the leave pay to the agency. When the agency learned about and investigated Texeira’s incorrect timekeeping entry, the manager of customer service at the Modesto Main Post Office served her with a notice of removal from federal service. The initial charge was a simple statement that she had incorrectly posted the unearned leave for an employee she was supervising. That notice of removal was revised on August 2, 2005 with a more detailed description of the conduct involved in her incorrect posting of annual leave, including a listing of several Postal Service rules and regulations that she allegedly had violated. The notice stated: Charge: Unacceptable Conduct: Falsification in Recording Time/Failure to Follow Proper Timekeeping Procedures.

When Texeira protested, the agency selected as its decisionmaker on the matter Richard Sarno, Human Resources Manager of the Sacramento District. Sarno conducted his own investigation and then on September 19, 2005 issued his Letter of Decision. He found the August 2 charges Afully supported by the evidence. In his decision on discipline, he wrote and highlighted that removal from federal service would be too severe He decided instead to reduce her in grade and pay to a part-time position at the much smaller postal facility in Ripon, California.

The court affirmed that part of the Board’s final decision that upheld the Postal Service’s charge that Ms. Texeira failed to follow proper timekeeping procedures, but vacated the Board’s final decision that upheld the Postal Service’s penalty of demotion to a part-time position on that charge. The case was remanded so an appropriate penalty can be imposed based only on the improper timekeeping charge.

Texeira vs USPS (PDF)

Tags:

Comments

15 Comments on To Err Is Not Human for Demoted Postal Supervisor

  1. retired1 on Mon, 3rd Mar 2008 9:20 am

    2. Was this INCOMPETENT POSTAL SUPERVISOR “boning” the employee she gave the annual leave to?

  2. common sense on Mon, 3rd Mar 2008 11:15 am

    3. I see retired1 is still using his cliche but with much more nastiness. You are truly a sick minded person.

  3. regina on Mon, 3rd Mar 2008 4:42 pm

    4. the employee must have been a PTF because a regular employee recieves leave at the beginning of the year a PTF must earn it bi weekly. After 19 years and 7 supervising and she doesn’t know this. ?????? yeah. What is posted the person took the leave and was paid for it but had not earned it yet. This story is a little confusing so post office.

  4. chilee on Mon, 3rd Mar 2008 6:59 pm

    5. Sarno?…there’s someone who could use alot of investigation!

  5. yo-mama on Tue, 4th Mar 2008 6:06 am

    6. DO NOT believe every news you read. This news is FAKE until I see something done on the supervisor I work for. Our supervisor does it all the time and gets away with it. They allow this things to happen. It’s good for the company. I bet hundreds of them do it.
    NONONONO I know what it is… they allow timecard cheating if it will benefit the company but in this case, it benefitted the employee therefore it’s a FRAUD. That’s what it is.

  6. hillary loves bill on Tue, 4th Mar 2008 8:43 am

    7. to ERR is HUGH- man , to forgive is DIVINE

  7. old one on Fri, 7th Mar 2008 8:35 pm

    8. Hell turn in a sick leave slip and they will charge you with Vacation… four differant supervisors doing clock ring just don’t work

  8. chrismas on Sat, 8th Mar 2008 4:24 pm

    9. 160 hrs sounds like an error big time right off–did she think no body would notice? —what… she did’nt know how to make the correction? –That’s a whole lot different from clock in clic up and clock out clic down– clock time is clock time! –I really think there’s more to this story but no body really wants to say but I’m not a Sup.

  9. judas on Sat, 8th Mar 2008 4:37 pm

    10. what, the mngr. of cust.svc. what when bodda you?How did U find out? how long did it take you to find out? You shoulda seen it right off! How many times has this happened in your office…where were you????

  10. beenthere4 on Mon, 10th Mar 2008 5:52 am

    11. I’m confused…I thought the pay system was designed to automatically change time to LWOP if annual leave was not available.

  11. Longtimer on Mon, 10th Mar 2008 5:54 pm

    12. If that had been a craft employee they been fired with NO chance of rehire, loss of retirement, or any back pay.

  12. Postal Pete on Sat, 15th Mar 2008 3:06 pm

    13. Retired 1 is jealous. That’s all.

  13. Anonymous on Mon, 17th Mar 2008 6:22 pm

    14. supervisors are never punished… happened at the p&dc I worked at ……supervisor was just moved to a small office and made postmaster of that office which was closer to his home.

  14. for now on Sun, 23rd Mar 2008 4:19 pm

    15. Who was she trying to kid. Her and the other employee split the 160 hours of pay. Only thing is
    she got caught. Wasn’t worth it, was it lady..

  15. ugugu on Tue, 25th Mar 2008 11:40 am

    16. you guys can throw all the shots you want you dont know the specifics of the case. she was held to a higher standard other male employees did it and retained there positions