Source: https://www.mspb.gov/ppp/13ppp.htm
Timestamp: 2018-12-13 22:01:24
Document Index: 193985889

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2302', '§ 2302', '§ 2302', '§ 2302', '§ 1214', '§ 2302']

Nondisclosure Forms, Policies & Agreements
implement or enforce any nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement, if such policy, form, or agreement does not contain the following statement: "'These provisions are consistent with and do not supersede, conflict with, or otherwise alter the employee obligations, rights, or liabilities created by existing statute or Executive order relating to (1) classified information, (2) communications to Congress, (3) the reporting to an Inspector General of a violation of any law, rule, or regulation, or mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, or (4) any other whistleblower protection. The definitions, requirements, obligations, rights, sanctions, and liabilities created by controlling Executive orders and statutory provisions are incorporated into this agreement and are controlling."
Finally, along these same lines, Congress added a new “personnel action” to the list in 5 U.S.C. § 2302(a) of personnel actions that cannot be taken for any of the 13 reasons prohibited by 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b). That new personnel action is “the implementation or enforcement of any nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement.”
Thus, several provisions of the law appear to be intended to assure that agencies do not enforce any nondisclosure policy, form, or agreement that would be contrary to employees’ rights under statute and Executive Order to “blow the whistle” on waste, fraud, and abuse, or to otherwise properly communicate their concerns about Government actions consistent with such authorities. These provisions therefore serve the purpose of the WPEA stated above.
May the MSPB review an employee’s claim of being subjected to a 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(13) PPP in all situations?
No. As is true of most other PPP’s, the MSPB lacks the authority to consider an employee’s claim of an alleged violation under § 2302(b)(13) except when it is raised as an affirmative defense in a matter over which the MSPB otherwise has appellate jurisdiction. The Board has long held that a claim of a PPP (other than one under section 2302(b)(8) and now under portions of (b)(9)), does not form an independent basis for MSPB to exercise its appellate jurisdiction. See In re Wren, 2 M.S.P.R. 1, 2 (1980). Of course, the Special Counsel can bring a complaint for corrective and disciplinary action when she believes that any PPP has been committed. Such actions are brought under 5 U.S.C. §§ 1214 and 1215, respectively.
Are there any Board decisions involving 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(12)?