Opinion ID: 2543334
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Answering Machine:

Text: The record fully supports the IPC's factual findings with regard to the charge of insubordination for failing to disconnect the answering machine. The IPC concluded that Smith gave Whittier at least two direct orders to disconnect the answering machine connected to his secretary's telephone. Whittier did not do so, and offered no explanation to Smith at the time of the order. Whittier contends he was caught in a Catch-22 with regard to Smith's directive to unplug the answering machine because he was faced with an opposing order not to unplug anything by Ralph, an outside contractor hired to overhaul the telephone systems. Even if Whittier's contention is true, he failed to communicate this Catch-22 to Smith at the times he was ordered to disconnect the machine. Additionally, unplugging the answering machine had no bearing on the overall telephone system because the answering machine was a freestanding unit, only plugged into the actual telephone. In October, after Smith's second order to do so, the Section had no difficulty in immediately removing the machine. Even if it were to affect the telephone system, Whittier made no effort to and never requested permission from Ralph the phone guy to unplug the answering machine. This demonstrates an intentional disregard of Smith's instructions.