I, Joe Carson, PE, played a role in the passage of the Energy Employee Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act at of 2000 (EEOICPA). Over 3 billion dollars have been paid to about 25,000 claimants by that law.
Essentially, the Department of Energy and its contractors failed to inform their workers of hazards they faced and failed to protect them from those hazards as they worked to create America's nuclear arsenal during the Cold War. Since it is so difficult to sue the government, particularly when classified information is involved, Congress passed the law that provides a lump sum payment of $150,000 (plus ongoing medical expenses and lost wages in some situations) to those workers or their survivors.
10,000 or more federal employees have sought the protection of the Office of Special Counsel from prohibited personal practices (PPP) since 1989 and did not receive the protection that OSC is required to provide-specifically, OSC did not make and/or appropriately report its required determination, "whether there are reasonable grounds to believe a prohibited personal practice has occurred, exists, or is to be taken," which is the Office of Special Counsel's fundamental obligation to those who seek its protection. Additionally, The Merit Systems Protection Board, since 1989, has failed to conduct its required oversight of the Office of Special Counsel's compliance with its duties to protect federal employees from prohibited personal practices.
OSC Watch is considering calling upon Congress to legislate relief for the victims of the Office of Special Counsel, by passing a law that provides a lump-sum payment of $100,000.00 of every instances in which an employee filed a prohibited personal practice complaint with the office of special counsel since 1989 which alleged a non-reprisal type PPP for which OSC has jurisdiction in which OSC cannot demonstrate it made and appropriately reported its PPP determination, and a lump-sum payment of $300,000.00 of every instances in which an employee filed a prohibited personal practice complaint with the office of special counsel since 1989 which alleged a reprisal type PPP (5 USC 2302(b)(8) and (b)(9) type PPP's) in which OSC cannot demonstrate it made and appropriately reported its PPP determination.
Getting such a law passed would be difficult, for reasons including OSC and MSPB still deny their lawbreaking (i.e. victims of their lawbreaking continue to be created everyday.)
However, the key advocacy groups
GAP and
POGO now agree it is reasonable to claim that such lawbreaking exists and has existed since 1989, which means Congress and the media will now consider these claims reasonable.
To move the ball forward, the victims of the lawbreaking have to organize themselves, find allies, get Congressional and media attention and support, "out" the OSC and MSPB lawbreaking, and evaluate instituting a class-action suit. No one will do this for them, they have to do it themselves. Unless there is a chance for significant monetary relief to compensate the victims of OSC and MSPB lawbreaking, this will not happen. Unless lawyers get involved because they see the chance to make significant money from such a class-action suit, it probably will not happen either. Everyone has too much to do to get involved unless there is a reasonable chance for compensation.
OSC has the records of who filed PPP complaints with it since 1989, so locating the victims of its lawbreaking (or their survivors) can be done, if Congress wants it done, or if lawyers get serious about a class-action suit.
OSC Watch is a "coalition of the willing." http://whsknox.blogs.com/osc_watch If you have filed one or more PPP complaints with OSC since 1989, or know someone who may have, OSC Watch exists to get you and them a measure of justice from OSC/MSPB lawbreaking. But it will not happen unless enough victims (or their survivors) make it happen.
For OSC Watch
Joe Carson, PE
