Retaliation and the Reduction in Force
Costa, Hopkins, Juarez and Liggins
Hello everyone, you may not know me, especially if you do, please read this as an attempt to help, not harm. Put on your favorite song, take a walk, step outside and engage the world — anything that reminds you that you have power, you can make a difference.
Preface
I just don’t know how to write this first sentence. I have a lot to be thankful for. What is hurting me the most is that so many more people are hurting more than my family. Let me explain.
My partner works for the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) and was given a false termination notice. I’ll get to that in a second as that has sent a shockwave through our family. However, some of her colleagues were also given termination notices who have veterans preference and we are deeply saddened by this.
To qualify, a veteran must generally:
Have served on active duty (not just training).
Have an honorable or general discharge.
Meet the service requirements for 5-point or 10-point preference.
Not be retired at the rank of major or higher (some exceptions apply).
Her co-worker was terminated under the recent terminations of probationary employees and is a veteran. She will have to fight the termination and that will most likely take years. This person is a warrior and they have our deepest respect and admiration.
My partner is scared to her bones of retaliation and is not able to speak freely about her experiences as she still respects the oath she has taken. I cannot begin to tell you how in awe I am of her resilience. I am so blessed to be her companion in life and the mother of my child.
So, I’ll speak for her.
A Matter of Performance
My partner works in Human Resources. They have a specific task of ensuring that the Federal Workforce under their purview are treated correctly under Federal Law and have taken an oath to that effect.
In the lead up to the termination letters in February of 2025, VBA managers were required to audit the probationary records of all employees and submit a list of correct information to the overall VBA leadership who then sent it to OPM. This list included my partner and she was correctly placed in the category of “Do Not Terminate“ by her superiors.
My partner started working for the VBA in early 2020 and is reaching her five year mark in employment. She passed her primary probationary period long ago. Last year, she received a Schedule A Appointment. This is a non-competitive hiring authority that allows qualified individuals with disabilities to be - in her case - considered for an internal promotion. She is legally qualified for this appointment under federal law.
Ok, this is where things start to get complicated with Federal Hiring and promotion. Please forgive me as this nuance is hard to convey properly.
VBA uses “HR·Smart” which is their human resources application. That application is built upon Oracle’s PeopleSoft Enterprise Human Resources platform. In HR·Smart, when someone is placed in a new employment role in a Schedule A appointment they are placed on what I can only describe as a “secondary“ probationary period in the new role.
This is important as she finished her primary probationary period of one year under 5 U.S.C. § 3321(a) by 2021. She moved into an excepted service role last year and her secondary probationary period ends in March of this year.
From what I understand in reading 5 U.S.C. § 3321(a) is that “probation“ is a very overloaded term. “Trial Period“ or “Evaluation Period“ makes more sense in my partner’s context, but the word probation is used synonymously within different rules of employment and more importantly: the rights afforded by completing the primary probationary period.
There are just too many rules to parse every case, but as I stated earlier my partner was placed on a “secondary“ probationary period. However, because of completing the original probation she is afforded different protections under the law.
She was not supposed to be terminated and asked her HR superiors if this was true well before termination notices were sent out. They affirmed that she was not supposed to be on a list for termination. She checked, because as a family we needed to know. She is also in HR so she is as close to an expert as one can be concerning merit and promotion. Her immediate superiors did their job correctly.
Then, this came through her email. I am condensing the email language, but we have the original if this ever goes to court.
MEMORANDUM FOR [My Partner]
FROM: XXX Chief Human Capital Officer
SUBJECT: Notification of Termination During Probationary Period
[Information Omitted For Brevity]
The Agency finds, based on your performance, that you have not demonstrated that your further employment at the Agency would be in the public interest. For this reason, the Agency informs you that the Agency is removing you from your position with the Agency and the federal civil service effective February 13, 2025.
[Information Omitted For Brevity]
I am going to walk past a lot of emotion here as I had to call my parents to ask for their help if this order was truly valid. I’m 49 years old and I have been working since I was able. I was working while I was still in High School. I cannot convey you to the emotions in that moment. And it was a lesson for me on how others have been treated in the past. I get it now, and apologies if I feigned knowing your pain.
So, let’s talk about my partner’s performance. Here are her performance evaluations for her tenure. One may also see these in the official transcripts of her employment if folks are skeptical that we are showing is the truth. These are facts.
2020 - Fully Successful
2021 - Excellent
2022 - Excellent
2023 - Outstanding
2024 - Outstanding
She has also received a “Quality Step Increase“ based on her 2024 performance. The authority for Quality Step Increases (QSIs) in federal employment is established under 5 U.S.C. § 5336, which authorizes agency heads to grant an additional step increase, known as a QSI, to General Schedule (GS) employees who demonstrate high-quality performance.
In her position a QSI is rarely, if ever, given. She is a full rock star. Performance has nothing to do with it.
Root Cause Analysis
I am a compliance specialist and I know quite a bit about root cause and incident analysis. If I were to put a root cause to what happened to my wife I would state it simply as this: a loss of control of the chain of command.
When one inspects the email; the “from” field states that is was sent from the Chief Human Capital Officer’s email address - however I am skeptical that the origin was from them.
I can’t look at the Active Directory Structure, Email headers, or exchange logging but I would love to. When I see this as a professional I ask: Where did this email originate from? Did the Chief Human Capital Officer actually press the button and were they complicit? Or, was there a MAJOR SECURITY INCIDENT INSIDE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
I swear I am not trying to drive conspiracy, but this looks like a very well coordinated and executed highly advanced intrusion/phishing attempt inside the network by authorized or coerced users. Given all my training I would have flagged this as a suspicious attempt and demanded an immediate review of security. I would have reported this to the FBI.
If I were to be so bold as to give an opinion on what happened to my partner it would be that these laws were broken:
Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) – 18 U.S.C. § 1030
Wire Fraud Act – 18 U.S.C. § 1343
Aggravated Identity Theft – 18 U.S.C. § 1028A
The Fourth Amendment
Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) – 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2523
Privacy Act of 1974 – 5 U.S.C. § 552a
Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) – 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680
Civil Rights Act – 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (For State Actors) & Bivens Actions (For Federal Actors)
False Claims Act (FCA) – 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729-3733
Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) – 44 U.S.C. §§ 3551-3558
The facts are not in dispute here. It took about a week, but they rescinded the order:
MEMORANDUM FOR [My Partner]
FROM: Chief Human Capital Officer
SUBJECT: Rescission of Termination During Probationary Period
This is to provide notification that the Agency is rescinding the Notification of Termination During Probationary Period, dated February 13, 2025. You will be placed in a pay and duty status for any scheduled workdays you did not work between the issuance of the notice on February 13, 2025, and delivery of this notification. If VA does not receive confirmation of delivery, this notice is presumed delivered on the day it is sent electronically or 5 days after sending via U.S. Mail. You are to return to duty the next scheduled workday after the delivery or, if applicable, presumed delivery of this notification.
That is the real email sent to my partner with brevity. We have the email to prove this. Happy to present this in court.
This was not a simple mistake. This was gross negligence that caused extreme harm to my family.
Please, stop telling me you are following orders
I am in no position to change the government. I sit here completely at the mercy of others. The only thing I can ask is that you share this post and get our experience and the experience of others to legal teams willing to stand up for civil rights.
Look, I am a Son of the American Revolution and so is my child. My family has been in Pennsylvania since before America was America. This is a picture of us at the home we are saving with a very limited budget. We’re watching the solar eclipse.
I am not affiliated with any political party. I just want my family to have a future. I want all our families to have a reasonable shot at happiness. Depriving us of our rights — any one of us our rights — has to be a cycle we break in this country.
It has to stop now. I keep thinking of our friend, a veteran who is still fighting their termination and the road ahead will be long.
We understand that nothing will come of this for us. At the very least we ask that folks in power honor their oath and duty to your brothers and sisters in the Armed Services.
Share this with everyone you can.