The law recognizes that managers retaliate against a whistleblowing employee by taking or threatening to take a “personnel action.” One of the hardest to pin down, but most commonly cited, agency actions defined by whistleblower law as a “personnel action” is a “significant change in duties, responsibilities, or working conditions.” The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), the agency tasked with adjudication of whistleblower retaliation appeals for federal employees, recently issued its decision in Skarada v. Department of Veterans Affairs, and provided a framework for deciphering whether a change in duties, responsibilities, or working conditions is significant enough to constitute a “personnel action” covered by federal whistleblower law.

The Whistleblower Protection Act covers a broad range of “personnel actions” under its definitions in 5 U.S.C. § 2302(a)(2)(A). Some of these actions are obvious and easy to understand: an appointment, a promotion, a reassignment, a performance evaluation, a decision about pay, or a disciplinary action like a termination. The final listed “personnel action” is “any other significant change in duties, responsibilities, or working conditions.”

As the Board noted, the legislative history of this statutory provision indicates that Congress meant for it to be interpreted broadly to include “any harassment or discrimination that could have a chilling effect on whistleblowing or otherwise undermine the merit system,” and that it “should be...

Read Full Story: https://fedmanager.com/news/what-kind-of-significant-change-in-working-condit...