Posted on 02/09/2017 4:55:56 AM PST by SJackson
Personal story: I took over a supervisory position about two decades ago. There was an official leave system in place, but (for some reason) people tried to get around using it. They would just tell the old supervisor that they were going to be off and that was that. How he kept track of things, I have no idea (though I suspect he did not).
When I took over, I shut down this practice and told people to use the official system. There was much unhappiness and pushback (probably because people didn’t want to burn actual leave). A few people also filed complaints. However, I was on solid ground as I was following procedure. Even 20 years later, the whole thing left a bad taste in my mouth, which is why I’m skeptical.
The official procedure is for the worker to get their direct supervisor’s OK the day before leave. Her direct supervisor, according to the story, was himself on leave on the day in question. So she emailed her second-tier supervisor and got an “Okay” in return.
Judge Allyson K. Duncan
Duke University School of Law, J.D., 1975
Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 1978-1986
Appointed by President George W. Bush
Duncan was confirmed on a recorded Senate vote of 93-0 on July 17, 2003, and she received her commission on August 15, 2003
The American Bar Association rated Duncan Unanimously Well Qualified for the nomination
Was appointed in 2011 to the Duke University Board of Trustees.
Good point, however it sounds like that when you changed (restored) the system you gave people notice.
Whether that occurred in this case is not clear from the information presented. Unfortunately, in government service, I have seen procedures and standards enforced differently within the same office depending upon the employee’s relationship with the supervisor. Too often supervisors play favorites or pursue grudges.
Without more information, we can’t be sure, but I can’t dismiss this out of hand. I’ve seen things like this too often before, and the usual culprits are poor and/or capricious managers.
If there is evidence the list was approved by her boss she will have a case in her favor and/or the Union that represents her to get her job back. However if she took those days off without that approval then she abandoned her job and the organization has the right to show her the door.
Again without all the details the case is moot
I am having trouble figuring out how this case wound up in the Fourth Circuit. The article said it was moved there at there on the request of the Airport Authority, but on what grounds?
If the plaintiff is a DC resident, as the article indicates, and the defendant Airport Authority is based in the District of Columbia, it would seem that the case would go through the DC Circuit, NOT the Fourth Circuit.
And BTW, there is no indication in this article as to how the District Court below ruled on this case, whichever that District Court that was.
If the past administration can try to force elderly nuns to pay for birth control...
Good chance that her new boss was black, and that the REAL issue was antisemitism. It's taboo among leftists to discuss it, but the fact is that statistically, blacks rank second among American racial/ethnic groups in the prevalence of antisemitism. Only Muslims/Arabs are more antisemitic as a group.
One comment. If the other supervisor said “thanx” that is proof that she could not have been awol. The superior had an affirmative responsibility to say that’s not approved. Notification with a “thanx “ response is tantamount to approval.
The charge of awol was bogus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.