A win for veterans
Decorated Army Veteran Prevails in Battle against the U.S. Postal Service
One of the highest ranking National Guard non commissioned officers in the Army’s Special Forces whom the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) unlawfully terminated over a decade ago has prevailed in his long fight to regain his job. A Judge awarded Sergeant Major Richard Erickson 12 years of back-pay and benefits and ordered the USPS to cancel his removal and retroactively reinstate him. This decision may cost the USPS and the federal government over $2,000,000 in back-pay, benefits, attorney fees, and retirement enhancements, making this one of the largest awards in an employment case against the USPS and the federal government.
“The good news for other service men and women is that Erickson’s perseverance in this case not only afforded him his old job, back-pay, and benefits, it has strengthened countless service members’ rights under USERRA by setting judicial precedent.” said Mr. Rinckey.
Decorated Army Veteran Prevails in Battle against the U.S. Postal Service | PostalReporter News Blog
Now you know why as more and more of these cases come out why I don't trust our Government,knowing they were wrong they used the unlimited resources of the Federal Government to fight and deny him his just reward,whomever was behind this and whomever unlawfully terminated him need to be fired for incompetence.
The USPS is famous for stuff like this and normally no one gets terminated or penalized in any way to doing such things. They care less about having to pay out down the line mainly due to no accountability. They use what I call the "100 Rule"(might have been invented by insurance companies). So I will use an insurance company example(but the 100 rules works in many scenarios):
Originally Posted by dukalmighty
Deny 100 claims
50 of those denied accept it and do nothing
Of the 50 remaining they appeal to first step and all are denied
40 of those denied accept it and do nothing
The last 10 appeal all the way and prevail
Insurance company does not care since all of the claims should have paid yet they only paid out on 10
Bottom line the company saved/made money
So we're looking at another increase in stamp price?
I was called back to active duty in 2004. After 18 months (13 of them in combat), I returned to my "civilian" job (also with the Federal Gov't). While on AD, I had been passed over for tenure and promotion - both violations of USERRA. So had several of my colleagues. Together, we wrote to all of the "higher-ups" in our organization, to no avail. Only after threatening legal action (and actually having legal representation to back it up) were any of us given due consideration. After all of this, my Department "fixed" the problem by including language in upcoming versions of their promotion/tenure rules that stated, in effect, "raters and supervisors should consider military service when making decisions about promotion and tenure." Of course, this statement is in direct violation of USERRA (which is Federal law), and they (my Department) thought they were doing us a FAVOR by including it.
I am ashamed to admit that I didn't have the intestinal fortitude that the Sergeant Major had, and did not fight the issue as he did. I eventually got retroactive tenure, but it was a "black mark" on my reputation with upper management throughout my career for having demanded that they follow Federal law. Cheers to the SGM, and here's hoping that the $2M hit the USPS just took reminds other federal agencies that they are not above the law.
I wonder why they are BANKRUPPED ; ) :rolleyes:
Good for you, OPFOR. You'd think the gov't would look out for its own, but as you (and I) have found, it often does just the opposite.
I thought that they only increased stamp prices when then needed more "This Line Closed" signs.
Originally Posted by OldVet
Glad this vet survived 'two' fights.:congrats: