Background
Casey Hays, a pro se litigant employed by the United States Postal Service as a Manager of Customer Service Operations, was placed in an off-duty unpaid status after making threatening text messages to postmasters. The agency proposed his removal based on unacceptable conduct. Although Hays was incarcerated at the time the notice was mailed to his address of record, the Merit Systems Protection Board found that the agency complied with due process and that Hays failed to prove harmful procedural error. The Board affirmed the removal, and Hays petitioned for review in the Federal Circuit.
The court’s reasoning
The court applied the standard of review under five United States Code section seven seven zero three subsection c, affirming unless the decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, not in accordance with law, obtained without required procedures, or unsupported by substantial evidence. The court focused on whether the agency provided adequate notice under the due process clause. The administrative judge found that preponderant evidence showed the notice was properly mailed to the address on record, creating a rebuttable presumption of receipt. The court agreed that Hays failed to provide convincing evidence to rebut this presumption, noting that he had not updated his mailing address with the agency. The court held that an employee is obligated to provide a current mailing address for official correspondence, and residing at a different address does not establish a due process violation if the notice was sent to the designated address.
What it means going forward
The ruling reinforces that federal agencies satisfy due process notice requirements by mailing removal notices to the employee’s official address of record, placing the burden on employees to keep their contact information current with the agency.