Opinion ID: 2324757
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The dispute over Form PL 456.

Text: On February 26, 1993, only four days after ordering Ms. Okyiri to approve Dr. Greenlee's voucher, Dr. Franklin issued a letter of warning to her in connection with a separate alleged act of insubordination. The ALJ, the OEA, and the trial judge all ultimately sustained Ms. Okyiri's grievance against this letter of warning, and the DCPL does not contest these rulings in the present appeal. The dispute is nevertheless relevant in that it sheds some light on the credibility of the various actors and on Dr. Franklin's motivation. The subject of this controversy might be considered almost trivial. The DCPL was about to revise its financial control form, styled PL 456, which was used by employees who needed to purchase goods or services for the DCPL. Dr. Franklin did not like the proposed revision. He claimed that he had directed Ms. Okyiri not to discuss the revised form and not to permit discussion of it at a forthcoming librarians' meeting. Dr. Franklin alleged in his letter of warning, and he subsequently testified before the ALJ, that Ms. Okyiri had allowed one of her subordinates to discuss implementation of the unauthorized revision of the PL 456 form, despite his instructions not to do so. He viewed her conduct as a disregard for my directive [and] as a clear act of insubordination. Ms. Okyiri denied that Dr. Franklin had told her not to discuss the revised form, and she and other witnesses testified that, in any event, the matter had not been discussed at the librarians' meeting. As the OEA pithily put it, Ms. Okyiri accused Franklin of concocting the whole incident as a means of retaliating against her for her refusal to certify the Greenlee invoice. The ALJ, as the trier of fact, did not credit Dr. Franklin's testimony, and he absolved Ms. Okyiri of any culpability in this matter.