Legal Document

534 U.S. 1122 S.Ct. 431151 L.Ed. 2d 323 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of United States Reports. Readers are requested notify Reporter Decisions, Supreme Court States, Washington, D. C. 20543, any typographical or other errors, order that corrections may be made goes press.UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, PETITIONERv.MARIA A. GREGORY No. 00-758. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED Argued October 9, 2001Decided November 13, 2001 Syllabus While three disciplinary actions petitioner Postal Service took against respondent were pending grievance proceedings pursuant Service's collective bargaining agreement with respondent's union, terminated employment after a fourth violation. The Civil Reform Act 1978 (CSRA) permits covered employees, such as respondent, appeal removals and serious Merit Systems Protection Board (Board) through negotiated procedure, but not both. Respondent appealed Board, where an agency must prove its charge by preponderance evidence, 5 U.S.C. § 7701 (c)(1)(B), proving only misconduct occurred, also penalty assessed reasonable relation it. An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) concluded termination was light her four violations. Although prior grievances, ALJ analyzed them independently, under approach set forth Bolling v. Department Air Force, 8 M. S. P. B. 658, found they clearly erroneous. petition for review ALJ's decision arbitrator overturned first action. did inform which denied petition. Federal Circuit vacated part remanded, holding ongoing used support penalty's reasonableness. Held: 1. independently when reviewing actions. reviews decision's substance extremely narrow arbitrary capricious standard, allows wide latitude fulfilling obligation role judicial ascertain if has met CSRA's minimum standards. There nothing about Board's Neither nor suggested applied policy inconsistently it lacks reasons approach. Nor independent contrary law. Circuit's reference Douglas Veterans Admin., 313, sets out framework actions, way describing process, not, suggests, indication violated §7701(c)(1)(B). More important, suggestion violates section's evidence standard would incorrect. own mechanism allowing agencies meet their statutory burden justifying all violations supporting penalty. Insofar adequate, prevailing either Board. Independent does violate general scheme, serious, minor, Where based on series some authority include each establish Any effects procedures result from parallel structures. If procedure employee receives fair. procedure's fairness this Court, presumption regularity attaches government agencies' deference appropriate. Pp. 48. 2. Because rely upon at time review, remand necessary determine effect reversal one had termination. 89.212 F.3d 1296, remanded. ON WRIT CERTIORARI TO OFAPPEALS FOR FEDERAL CIRCUIT O'Connor, J., delivered Rehnquist, Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Breyer, JJ., joined. Opinion Justice O'Connor Court. 1 eligible employees 7512 -7513. ruled that, assessing reasonableness these consider collectively bargained proceedings. 212 1298 (2000). broad discretion determining how need adopt rule, we now vacate further 2 * Maria Gregory worked letter technician responsibility overseeing carriers five mail routes, serving replacement carrier those routes. App. Pet. Cert. A15. On April 7, 1997, left work early take daughter doctor, ignoring supervisor's instructions sort route leaving. She received warning insubordination. 47-48. filed established between union employer, see generally 1998-2001 Agreement Between National Association Letter Carriers, AFL-CIO Service, Art. 15. 43. 3 Later same month cited delaying mail, another truck end day. Id., 45-46. suspended seven days, second grievance. 41-42. In August again disciplined various violations, including failing deliver certified attempting receive unauthorized unnecessary overtime. 38-40. 14-day suspension, 4 agreement, final time. September form requesting assistance completing or, alternatively, hours Considering request excessive, supervisor accompanied determined she overestimated overtime more than hour. 31-33. violation previous recommended removed Service. Ibid. 17, ordered effective nine days later. 24-29. previously served Army, falls into category "preference eligible" (CSRA). 7511 (a)(1)(B)(ii). CSRA provides opportunity (the Board). §§7512-7513. Under CSRA, could seek relief do §7121(e)(1). chose 6 When employing agency's action challenged bears evidence. settled procedures, requires actually 333-334 (1981). 7 Following guidelines, upheld termination, concluding shown beyond permissible limits A-29, A-36 A-40. following 658 de novo unless: "(1) [the employee] informed writing; (2) matter record; (3) given dispute charges higher level imposed discipline." 660-661. conditions met, limited whether 660. After finding Bolling's conditions, there no clear error. A-37. petitioned decision. pending, resolved (relating incident) favor, expunged. 3-16. advise ruling. then determination. A-9 A-10. 9 Appeals Circuit. 7703 (a). That court affirmed uphold factual findings respect 13 incident. F.3d, 1299. Taking notice fact underlying been arbitration, noting two remaining grievances still reversed determination reasonable. recognizing history "important factor" penalty, id., 1300, held "prior support" 1298. It therefore remanded 1300. We granted certiorari, 531 1143 (2001). II 10 decisions unsupported substantial "arbitrary, capricious, abuse discretion, otherwise accordance law." (c). Like counterpart Procedure Act, 706 (2), narrow, Citizens Preserve Overton Park, Inc. Volpe, 401 402 , 416 (1971), substitute judgment Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co., 463 29 43 (1983). standards statute. conclude rule 11 argues sufficient obligations. adequacy particular supra us. said Bolling, instead adopting sweeping never regardless provides. likewise asks forbidding review. ruling requiring different mechanism, so Her brief neither mentioned arguing should hold off altogether outcome collectively-bargained Brief Petitioner 00-3123 (CA Fed.), p. Moreover, even us, lack briefing specific functioning case. thus permissibly meets standard. 12 certainly indeed, taken 19 years. See Carr 714 (1982). have argued require wait until challenges completed rendering decision, ignore being former cause undue delay. Reply 6-7. latter would, many cases, effectively preclude relying employee's history, itself acknowledged provision statute justify new rule. 1299-1300. At oral argument respondent'scounsel pointed statement later "the foundation analysis compromised." 1300 (citing 313 (1981)). point specifically discussed placing proof action, counsel claimed, thought section. Tr. Oral Arg. 49. read citation implicit §7701(c)(1)(B), particularly nowhere mentions Rather, interpret entire process 14 §7701(c)(1)(B)'s To extent places dealt basis burden. adequate proof, 15 Amicus Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) scheme. Curiae 8-12. elect certain seriousness, suspension reduction grade pay. For minor workers exist. §7121. According NTEU, scheme deprives like true contemplates least (those represented unions) will forums challenging depending seriousness. attempted terminated, exceeded authority. case, however, asked something do. whole. 16 times reaching conclusion arbitrator. resolution all, because agreements unions withdraw becomes 10-11, 37; 14. Rather inconsistent possibilities structures CSRA. 17 Such results necessarily unfair. who appeals note agencies, Chemical Foundation, Inc., 272 14-15 (1926), III 18 grievance, already Jones 24 R. 429, 431 (1984). As arbitration rendered concedes 15-16. vacated, case consistent opinion. 20 ordered. 21 concurring 22 Ginsburg, judgment. 23 concurring. I join Court's far goes, go enough. concludes so-called framework) question "not us." Ante, 5. think is. 25 below petitioner's terminate abused 26 contests consideration constitute use framework, (1981), procedural safeguards.1 27--28. Respondent, contrast, counters insufficient prevent "unfairness" inherent show supported "preponderance evidence." 34-37. Properly disposing address arguments.2 27 difficult task federal safeguards. Title 7503 (b), instance, basic protections receiving discipline entitled (CSRA).3 Conspicuously absent Thus, points out, "it can hardly collateral conflicts Congress provide [Board] actions." 12-13 28 (emphasis original). Respondent's evidence" (c)(1)(B) unavailing. logical consequence position required facts relied ever grieved.4 Nothing supports rather remarkable proposition. most, existence actions; place 30 central flaw relies mistaken assumption somehow linked. statute, entirely separate result, taking account assessment subsequent action.5 31 reasons, agree proceedings.6 Notes Petitioner's quite relevant here considered framework. ante, 3; accurately notes merely erred Petitioner, put squarely play contention practice considering discretion. Given petitioner, defending practice, raises surely waived right argue provided inadequate save invalidated applies suspensions less. fall category. Ginsburg's contrary, post, 3, n. (opinion judgment), rests explained infra, not. Whether chosen access irrelevant answering question. Indeed, reasoning suggests cases ability requirement, be, Ginsburg intimates, "arbitrary capricious" disregard arbitrator's Post, judgment). argument, below, erroneous premise inextricably ties together sure, link Cf. MSPR 430-431 But so. cites mandating step. simply establishes designed protect rights, proceedings, adjudicate rights secured agreements. out: "Independent . arbitrator." 8. stated 5, supra, relevance finalized 32 33 judgment, grounds requires, one, "clearly erroneous." 660 summary highly deferential arguably requirement sustain "only [it] (c)(1)(B). maintains unsettled issue, reliance "independent review" discipline, 6, Nevertheless, resist below. 34 MSPB regulations allow reopen reconsider "at time." CFR 1201.118 (2001) ("The [an administrative judge] motion time, provisions part."). every reason believe credited arbitration. (1984) (suspension "reversed cancelled current charge").1 Notably, agrees invoke reopening "in event record revised successful grievance." 28; (counsel confirmed recognition [B]oard's permit [B]oard proved successful"). 35 might well situation refuse reopen. Wright, Miller, & E. Cooper, Practice §4433, 311 (1981) (a "judgment preclusive [a prior] stand [prior] reversed"); 312-315; Restatement (Second) Judgments §16 Comment c (1980) (nullification earlier "may ground appropriate suitable restitution benefits obtained judgment"); §84 (generally, "a valid award rules res judicata, exceptions qualifications, court").2 36 bring attention i.e., dated May incident, 1-2; 43, MSPB's regulations, ask expungement "on motion." (2001); "could brought today"). resulting third seven-day June 2; 41-42, 45-46, fourteen-day 37 asserts resists collective-bargaining predischarge survive discharge final. 10-12, 26-27. suggest, disarmed postdischarge continuation completion arbitration.3 38 Gregory, moreover, elected resort "[a]t advice then-counsel." 9. challenge dismissal arbitrator.4 Had opted dismissal, fared better; appears labor arbitrator, accorded weight grieved yet Arbitration AFL-CIO, USPS, Case E94 N-4E-D 96075418, pp. 16-18 (Apr. 19, 1999) (Snow, Arb.), Lodging 57-59 (referring parties' "past giving unresolved standing removal hearings," continuance "pending grievance"); USPS D90 N-4D-D 95076768, 19-21 (Mar. 20, 1996) (Sickles, 27-29 (although await ordering removal, yielded resolution); Post Office Mail Handlers, MC-S-0874-D, (June 18, 1977) (Fasser, ("Until th[e] [of action] finally adjudicated, proceeding."). having option forgone weigh while underway, comfortably situated complain employed 39 (1) regulation, alternative forum pursued, explicit reservation review," 8, (4) apparent, incorrect view proceeding, 1299, (2000),5 order. comprehends schemes bargained-for harmonious Thomas does, 3-4 (concurring opinion), unrelated other. Gregory's logically employer removing employee, "whether grieved." Failure pursue available avenue appeal, matter. fails timely adverse bound See, e.g., New Haven Inclusion Cases, 399 392 481 (1970) (holding party "took appeal" "foreclosed judicata" seeking order); Miller 305 ("preclusion cannot defeated electing fo[r]go appeal"); 305-308; §§83 a, 84 e (in general, adjudications awards judgments). sought "make clear" "if reverses Circuit]," "would object [a] 55. Grievances arbitration" "by representative Union." 15, §4(A)(2). certiorari state presented follows: "Whether agency, disciplining 1978, 1101 et seq., proceedings." (I); (I) added).

Classification Label: 8