Mark, I have attached a few of the basic documents. The AJ originally dismissed the marital status case but it was remanded on appeal and he was ordered to review it for USERRA and VEOA violations. We have not been able to find a lawyer in this area that is confident in MSPB cases, and who understands USERRA/VEOA violations, prohibited personnel practices and dealing with a federal agency. The Department of Labor has assigned an investigator to pursue the VEOA complaint Anne made with them, but they will not participate in the MSPB appeal. We are not in a position to put down a huge retainer and run up huge legal costs. The MSPB will award attorney's fees if we prevail and we can add a percentage of any award to make the case attractive to a willing and qualified lawyer. Our current settlement offer is - reinstatement to present with all back pay, etc. and $250,000. I hope that the unique aspects of this case; probationary employee, military reserve CWO4 with 30 years of service, USERRA, female on female discrimination, and blatant misuse of the public trust will interest a lawyer with the experience to bring it to a quick resolution. We still hold out hope that they will want to avoid a messy public hearing that puts the credibility of a bunch of scientists under the scrutiny of the MSPB/OPM/DOL and the OSC. If any of your colleagues are interested, I would be happy to talk to them. Thanks for your time, Pete
Attachment:
091017.letter to Buck Sutter.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
Attachment:
BOARD REMAND OPINIONS & ORDER.aspx.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
Attachment:
NEY ORIGINAL APPEAL MARITAL STATUS.aspx.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
Attachment:
Ney Response to Agency Interrogatory.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
Attachment:
RESPONSE TO AGENCY'S MOTION TO DISMISS.aspx.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
On Feb 23, 2011, at 3:40 PM, Mark S. Zaid wrote: Peter - Thanks for your e-mail. We would be interested in learning more about your wife's case. I have cc'd my colleagues who I work with on these types of cases to solicit their input as well. I know for my participation, and I believe for theirs as well, I work on an hourly basis. Sometimes I am willing to work out flat fee arrangements and we can certainly discuss that if you prefer. I don't handle contingency cases. Do you have any key summary documents you can send that will not overwhelm us at the outset? Mark ____________________________________________________________________________ __ This electronic mail (e-mail) transmission is meant solely for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. It contains confidential information that may also be legally privileged. Any copying, dissemination or distribution of the contents of this e-mail by anyone other than the addressee or his or her agent for such purposes is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify me immediately by telephone, facsimile or e-mail and purge the original and all copies thereof. Thank you. Mark S. Zaid, Esq. Mark S. Zaid, P.C. 1250 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 200 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 454-2809 direct (202) 330-5610 fax www.MarkZaid.com -----Original Message----- From: Peter Ney [mailto:pete@ney.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 3:27 PM To: mark@markzaid.com Cc: Anne Ney Subject: Ney v. Department of Commerce (MSPB) Mr Zaid, I asked Eugene Fidell for a referral and he gave me your name. I am representing my wife in an appeal before the MSPB that has been going on for over one year. It involves USERRA violations, marital discrimination and prohibited personnel practices. In a nutshell, Anne Ney is a 30 year Coast Guard veteran who was terminated by the National Marine Fisheries Service eight days before the end of her one year probationary period. She was in a term position (Fisheries Biologist) and through discovery we have found that the Agency did not want to hire her (they had already decided on a younger, single, non-military woman), but they were required to offer her the position because of her veterans preference. She was in a active reserve status while she was employed by NMFS and they seem to have terminated her when they found out that the Coast Guard had asked her to remain in the active reserves beyond her 30 years. After she was terminated, they hired the person they originally tried to hire into the same position, which they converted to a permanent position, and they re-wrote the KSAs to match her qualifications. We are able to prove beyond any doubt, through discovery and 4000 e-mails, that the performance issues were not only fabricated, but relate to work she was required to do while simultaneously drilling for the Coast Guard. The AJ in Atlanta has accepted the USERRA and marital status appeals (he denied the VEOA appeal). We are currently in a 30 day mediation suspension, although no mediation has begun. The Agency is not willing to settle or even discuss settlement. We have set the damages to lost (past and future) income, lost career opportunities, and damage Anne's reputation in our community at an amount that we find fair, obviously they disagree. We are looking for an attorney that will represent her at the hearing. This case is unique and Eugene was surprised that we have kept it alive this long. All the documents are organized and we have been timely in all the filings. I would like to discuss this opportunity with you and I look forward to hearing from you. MSPB: AT 315H 10 0148 B 1 AT 4324 11 0181 I 1 Peter J. Ney 5300 27th Ave N St Petersburg, FL, 33710 pete@ney.com (727) 667-3668 (mobile) (727) 374-5732 (home)=