Opinion ID: 783068
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Count 127: Violation of Plaintiff's Substantive RIF Rights

Text: 87 Plaintiff also challenges his RIF on various substantive grounds. Specifically, he challenges the overall legitimacy of the reorganization that caused his RIF. In responding to such a claim, TVA bears the burden to demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the RIF was legitimate and was properly applied to the individual employees. See Gandola v. FTC, 773 F.2d 308, 313 (Fed. Cir.1985) (If the agency proves that the reduction in force regulations were invoked for a legitimate reason and that those regulations were properly applied to the individual employees ... the agency action will be sustained.) (citation omitted); Wilburn v. Dep't of Transp., 757 F.2d 260, 262 (Fed.Cir.1985) (An agency has the burden of demonstrating to the board that its action is supported by a preponderance of the evidence....). 88 It is not disputed that the RIFs were part of a reorganization, undertaken by TVA, of several departments. A reorganization is an appropriate reason for a RIF. See 5 C.F.R. § 351.201(a)(2) (Each agency shall follow this part when it releases a competing employee from his or her competitive level ... when the release is required because of ... reorganization....); Gandola, 773 F.2d at 312 (holding that a RIF taken to reduce the manpower within the ceiling allocation constituted an appropriate management consideration) (internal quotation marks omitted). Moreover, it is not disputed that the RIF applied to everyone in Plaintiff's department; therefore it occurred in an even-handed manner. Plaintiff's suspicions about the consultant, Scott Madden, who had advised TVA to undertake the reorganization, are insufficient to overcome TVA's showing that the RIF occurred pursuant to bona fide management considerations. Gandola, 773 F.2d at 312. Because TVA met its burden of demonstrating that the RIF was legitimate, and Plaintiff has not asserted any genuine issue of material fact to rebut the RIF's evident legitimacy, we affirm the district court's grant of summary judgment to TVA on this claim. 89