The Petitioner is a preference eligible United
States Veteran that has 8 years of prior federal
employment with the United States Postal Service
(USPS) where he reached Career Tenure Status
before leaving the USPS for the private sector.
On November 19th, 2015 the Petitioner received
his official offer letter of employment from the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) appointing him to
with
job
GS-12
IT
Specialist
position
a
Job
number MS-15-BLS-OT-144.
announcement
announcement number MS-15-BLS-OT-144 was a
noncompetitive Veterans Employment Opportunity
Act (VEOA) position.
On April 22nd, 2016, the Petitioner requested a
shop steward regarding his "Core Hours" being
removed from his schedule. On December 1st, 2016
the Petitioner was handed a termination letter
stating that he would be terminated on December
9th, 2016. The Petitioner's termination later didn't
state why the Petitioner was being terminated. The
Petitioner had 4 unexcused absences during his
entire time being employed by the BLS.

1. The Petitioner pointed out in his appeal to the
upon being
hired by
the
BLS it
MSPB that
"Reinstatement"
to
federal
constituted
a
employment where the Petitioner's prior Career
Tenure Status exempted him from a probationary
period. Did the BLS, MSPB and the United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit violate the
Petitioner's 5th and 14th Amendments Rights by
disregarding Title 5 CFR § 315.201(a)(c)(4), Title 5
CFR § 315.801(d) and Title 5 USC § 4303?

2. Which case takes precedence? Does National
Treasury Emp. Union v. Reagan where the US
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that
notification sent to plaintiffs of their selection to
federal jobs was an unconditional appointment,
even though the required appointment forms had
not yet been completed or Skalafuris v. The United
States where the US Court of Federal Claims ruled
that a SF-50 or Oath of Office is the last act of
appointing?

3. In the Petitioner's Informal Reply Brief, the
Petitioner pointed out to the US Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit that upon receiving his
official offer letter of employment on November
19th, 2015, which stated "Congratulations on your
welcome to the BLS" that
appointment and
pursuant to Title 5 CFR § 300.703 the Petitioner
was appointed to federal employment. Did the US
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit violate the
Petitioner's 14th Amendment Right by disregarding
Title 5 CFR § 300.703 and National Treasury Emp.
Union v. Reagan while
forcing
a law on the
Petitioner along with not providing the Petitioner
with equal protection under the law when the court
affirmed the MSPB decision referencing Skalafuris
v. The United States?

4. Upon being appointed to federal employment
an individual must complete requirements with
other federal agencies during the "Entry on Duty"
phase of the hiring process. In order to complete
those requirements

Petitioner's 5th and 14th Amendment rights violation