Opinion ID: 176714
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: December 21, 2004 through March 3, 2005: Vera's Initial Extended Absence and Rodriguez's Response

Text: During the time that she and Rodriguez were using the same office, from October 2004 through March 21, 2005, Vera was absent from work for over a month, from late December 2004 until the beginning of February, 2005. On December 21, 2004, Vera and Rodriguez discussed her need for time off to attend to her health issues and those of her children. [3] Vera had been absent or left early frequently in order to go to appointments with doctors or take her children to appointments. [4] She did not have any remaining paid leave of any kind. Rodriguez encouraged Vera to take a few weeks of unpaid leave in order to attend to her appointments in the hope that consolidating those appointments would permit her productively to resume her duties. According to Rodriguez, he requested that Vera provide documentation of her medical appointments so that he could approve the absence and he was under the impression that Vera's absence would begin in January. Vera was absent from December 27, 2004 to February 1, 2005. She did not provide any medical documentation prior to her leave. Vera stated that Rodriguez himself was on leave at the end of December so that she could not personally deliver the medical documentation to him. She was unable to explain why she did not leave the documents in the office for him or email them to him before her absence began. In late January 2005, before Vera's return to work, Rodriguez exchanged emails with Fabiana Nevado, his human resources advisor within the Civilian Personnel Advisory Center. Rodriguez sought advice on how to deal with Vera's absence, given her failure to submit a formal leave request or provide medical documentation before or during her absence. After Vera returned, on February 1, 2005, Rodriguez kept records of his employees' comings and goings for a day. He noted that four employees, including Vera, arrived late and/or left early on that day. Rodriguez called a staff meeting on February 7, 2005 to go over the problems he had observed, after which Vera went to speak to him but was rebuffed by Rodriguez, who told her they could speak later. On February 2, 2005, Vera submitted a letter from a doctor dated December 23, 2004, recommending that she be on an extended leave of absence to recuperate from trauma. On February 22, 2005, Rodriguez wrote a counseling letter to Vera citing her month-long absence and failure to follow established leave procedures. The letter explains that if an employee needs leave, the request has to be submitted along with an SF-71 and it has to be approved by the supervisor prior to taking leave. Rodriguez advised Vera that her unauthorized absences were affecting her job performance and that more serious disciplinary action, up to and including removal from your position, might result from her failure to comply with the procedures in the future. On March 3, Vera attended a leave and attendance workshop. On the same day, Vera received and acknowledged a memorandum from Rodriguez stating that the doctor's statement she provided was not adequate because it lacked a diagnosis and prognosis of [her] medical condition. In the memo, Rodriguez requested that Vera provide a statement that includes the nature of your illness, the expected time it will take for rehabilitation and your physical limitations during this period, as well as the duties she was unable to perform.