this case it promotes the efficiency of the service and promotes the agency mission and then that number two which i hope one of my brief is just denying that you know somebody somehow amounts to misconduct and then this third allegation that she made this comment which she denied in the record which  that that i think the arbitrator completely ignored he didn't focus on how this allegation came about he didn't focus on officer spikes the airport police officer how he said the recruiter who was present with him was so impressionable but yet this is the penalty of removal says but a federal agency that we don't trust you to do this job anymore that's the only thing it says this is not the first time for her disciplinary action correct but when they and that's why we they allege we couldn't trust you to do anymore and that was interact with municipal law enforcement officers at the marinas in the county of the city if she was still untrustworthy that how to use a locker to go badge gun uniform and the community interacting with not only  that there are three i mean isn't the answer there are there are degrees of untrustworthiness and offsetting possible needs of the agency and i mean is it now within the agency's reasonable discretion about penalty to say there are five or six of these pretty unpleasant incidents we don't want them to continue indefinitely we don't think you know you're so worrisome to  that we need to make sure that from to day going forward you're not dealing with anybody but we're not going to put up with this and i think you would be credibility for that position if they didn't allow her to do this full range of duties for ten months they knew about the allegation they had investigated and concluded pretty quickly and even after she was proposed terminations i think it was a three or four month time span that she continued to do this what range of duties and when she presented her own apply to the chief patrol agent the deciding it would be legitimate terminator just because they think she's be aggressive to the problem i don't think she was accused of being aggressive here and i'm certainly not what i'm saying your honor i'm just saying is that when you're in an unfortunate position the person on the receiving end of that is not always going to be receptive to it that the assertion of authority that's the whole nature of the fourth amendment what i am saying here is that in this particular circumstance it was behind closed doors with only other law enforcement officers trying to convince the state officers to make enforcement action and it didn't take and after she called her supervisor and said this is my situation who supervised i said bring them on it and that's exactly what she did and this we're thinking about not because that airport police officer made a phone call or filed a complaint it was a public  her supervisor the very next day but for that phone call by him which i saw that is a fiction a fishing expedition this thing would never be before so again it comes down to less this misconduct at all just this b exchange which really never got loud according to the testimony it was this request for force an action that the state officer was reluctant to take and then these couple of the comments i don't know this person people hopping on me at work that somehow after twenty years of service the interrelationship with your colon on that day was going to lead to some further discussion with somebody he snatched when he said that's when i i called up this was free she reported me testify he does the same thing so we focus on the conduct site where the person that she's expressing this desire to to abstain or cement on this charge to say conduct that this other racially but yet somehow her conduct is perceived as negative attitude and that's the double standard that i had it rocks and it was the first time he ever had anybody say oh it was after spike's said that that might have been what he testified to but i mean with i think he had over twenty years long for six months i personally have trouble  accepting that but it's and i don't know how often they come into contact with persons who are you know in the country illegally at the jacksonville airport it's very hard work you know point of entry i mean this person was trying to get on a plane the person that was in custody to try to go back to guatemala with the ticket that he first place i think there was testimony from the agent dixon who supervisor that when you look at the whole picture it was clear that she was trying to get out of performing work and this was part of a practice that had happened in  interaction with an alien and any act this was their interaction with another law enforcement officer even if you are correct that they can be nasty to aliens which the government's position is that's completely inappropriate that want to even be relevant  she did she repeatedly kept pushing him even after he'd indicated he was going to press charges and it's important to note here that officer spikes had already spoken with ice and they had already determined that in this case ice was going to handle the prior disciplinary actions then argument says that she pretty much was devoted to an at will employee that if someone perceived her as having a nasty attitude or just not being nice enough she's fired and there's the just cause and i just can't see that as being the standard because i think you're exactly correct to honors that some of these conversations between walk force and officers especially out of the eyes of the public can get heated as to how the search for certain situations should result and i think that's exactly what was happening here and if you parallel that to what that is parallel in the same as her peers that how is that misconduct that can warrant the loss of her career and then we look at the remaining two allegations and that specification of inappropriate conduct all we have left is i don't know that person which is a very normal thing for someone to say and is what words mean pond off on me which law enforcement officer to law enforcement officer they're somewhat peers even though they work for different governments different ages since that being said we think there is ample reason here for the court to reverse th discussion well did you said that it was the norm for heated discussion yes if i think i don't i suppose it could rise to that but if that's in the record i don't think it's on the record but they can certainly lives that i think terms of how things should result but i don't think this conversation ever really got heated i mean it what officer spikes testified to was that he said he felt uncomfortable but nowhere in the specification do you see the word heated on anything else think nothing