Administrative Leave Reform Act
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4359) to amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that Federal employees may not be placed on administrative leave for more than 14 days during any year for misconduct or poor performance, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 4359
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Administrative Leave Reform Act''. SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE.
(a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following: ``Sec. 6330. Limitation on administrative leave
``(a) In General.--During any calendar year, an employee may not be placed on administrative leave, or any other paid non-duty status without charge to leave, for more than 14 total days for reasons relating to misconduct or performance. After an employee has been placed on administrative leave for 14 days, the employing agency shall return the employee to duty status, utilizing telework if available, and assign the employee to duties if such employee is not a threat to safety, the agency mission, or Government property.
``(b) Extended Administrative Leave.--
``(1) In general.--If an agency finds that an employee is a threat to safety, the agency mission, or Government property and upon the expiration of the 14-day period described in subsection (a), an agency head may place the employee on extended administrative leave for additional periods of not more than 30 days each.
``(2) Report.--For any additional period of 30 days granted to the employee after the initial 30-day extension, the agency head shall submit to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in the House of Representatives, the agency's authorizing committees of jurisdiction of the House of Representatives and the Senate, and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report, not later than 5 business days after granting the additional period, containing--
``(A) title, position, office or agency subcomponent, job series, pay grade, and salary of the employee on administrative leave;
``(B) a description of the work duties of the employee;
``(C) the reason the employee is on administrative leave;
``(D) an explanation as to why the employee is a threat to safety, the agency mission, or Government property;
``(E) an explanation as to why the employee is not able to telework or be reassigned to another position within the agency;
``(F) in the case of a pending related investigation of the employee--
``(i) the status of such investigation; and
``(ii) the certification described in subsection (c)(1); and
``(G) in the case of a completed related investigation of the employee--
``(i) the results of such investigation; and
``(ii) the reason that the employee remains on administrative leave.
``(c) Extension Pending Related Investigation.--
``(1) In general.--If an employee is under a related investigation by an investigative entity at the time an additional period described under subsection (b)(2) is granted and, in the opinion of the investigative entity, additional time is needed to complete the investigation, such entity shall certify to the applicable agency that such additional time is needed and include in the certification an estimate of the length of such additional time.
``(2) Limitation.--The head of an agency may not grant an additional period of administrative leave described under subsection (b)(2) to an employee on or after the date that is 30 days after the completion of a related investigation by an investigative entity.
``(d) Definitions.--In this section, the following definitions apply:
``(1) Investigative entity.--The term `investigative entity' means an internal investigative unit of the agency granting administrative leave, the Office of Inspector General, the Office of the Attorney General, or the Office of Special Counsel.
``(2) Related investigation.--The term `related investigation' means an investigation that pertains to the underlying reasons an employee was placed on administrative leave.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall begin to apply 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
(c) Rules of Construction.--Nothing in the amendment made by subsection (a) shall be construed to--
(1) supersede the provisions of chapter 75 of title 5, United States Code; or
(2) limit the number of days that an employee may be placed on administrative leave, or any other paid non-duty status without charge to leave, for reasons unrelated to misconduct or performance.
(d) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subchapter II of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by adding after the item relating to section 6329 the following new item: ``6330. Limitation on administrative leave.''.
H.R. 4359 is a commonsense solution to address the misuse of administrative leave for misconduct or performance issues.
Unfortunately, it has been commonplace for the Oversight and Government Reform Committee to hear stories of Federal employees who remain on administrative leave for months, or years, at a time.
Let me be clear, Mr. Speaker. The overwhelming majority of people who work for the Federal Government are good, honest, decent, patriotic people who care. They work hard, they are trying to serve their country, and they put in an honest day's work. But we do have some bad apples. Every once in a while, they show up, and they start working for the Federal Government. They create problems and they create mayhem.
Unfortunately, we have to tighten the rules surrounding their situation because we have had a number of Federal employees that have remained on administrative leave sometimes not just for days, sometimes not just for weeks. Sometimes this drags on for months and for years-- years--to be on administrative leave. While on administrative leave, these employees receive full pay and benefits despite the fact that they are not working. There are going to be extraordinary circumstances, but this is happening far too often.
It is particularly difficult to understand how the IRS could, for example, justify allowing Lois Lerner to sit on administrative leave for 4 months before her retirement. She was an individual who abused her power as a Federal employee by engaging in the political targeting of American citizens.
But she is not alone. This is certainly not a bill just about her situation. Every year, hundreds, if not thousands, of Federal employees are under investigation for significant misconduct and remain on administrative leave for far longer than is necessary to complete an investigation.
One reason administrative leave has become such a significant problem is because agencies simply find it easier to keep an employee on administrative leave. It is the path of least resistance. This means that some individuals face little to no penalty for significant misconduct and are all too often permitted to remain on administrative leave until they are able to retire.
Mr. Speaker, abuse of administrative leave is a real problem. H.R. 4359 will protect American taxpayer dollars from being further wasted.
Consider one example highlighted by the inspector general for the Environmental Protection Agency, who found an employee earning $120,000 a year annually while watching pornography on the job. This employee was placed on administrative leave for a year--a year. I believe, in this particular case, this person actually admitted to doing it. It wasn't just a casual oops. This person was watching for literally hours upon hours each day and admitted it. They put him on administrative leave, and this went on for a year.
Why should the American taxpayers have to pay for that? It is a clear waste of our dollars. The American people deserve better, and so do the employees who work around this person.
According to the Government Accountability Office report, the GAO, which reviewed the use of administrative leave between the years 2011 and 2013, 263 Federal employees were on administrative leave for more than a year at the 24 agencies reviewed. GAO found that those individuals on administrative leave cost the people, the American taxpayers, more than $31 million.
Why should we have to pay for that? It is an astonishing amount of money to pay for Federal employees, and they are doing absolutely nothing. They can, essentially, go wherever they want to go, and it is, essentially, a paid vacation.
It also sends the wrong message to the hardworking Americans from whom we levee taxes. We cannot use tax dollars to pay misbehaving or poor-performing Federal employees. There are often situations that come up where the employees need a fair chance to defend themselves. But again, under this bill, it gives them plenty of time to do that. If there needs to be an extension, there can be an extension; but if there is not timely disciplinary action, if any disciplinary action at all, for their performance issues, the American taxpayers are left holding the bag and the expense.
Mr. Speaker, agencies are abusing the system of administrative leave and failing to explain why.
In a report conducted by Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, agencies were found to be opaque about why they were using administrative leave, or completely nonresponsive, when Senator Grassley inquired about 58 employees at the Department of Defense that they had on administrative leave for more than a year. Think about that. At the DOD, the Department of Defense, they had 58 employees who had been on administrative leave for more than a year, and the Department of Defense just decided not to respond, just literally did not respond.
Mr. Speaker, I understand the need and utility of administrative leave. When used properly, administrative leave provides agencies with the flexibility needed to better manage human resources and to get to the bottom of certain situations, but it has become a tool that agencies hide behind with far too little oversight and accountability.
The shortcomings of the current system need to end, and this bill that I am the chief sponsor of will curb these abuses. Specifically, this legislation will limit the use of administrative leave for misconduct or performance issues to 14 days per year in order to push agencies to complete their investigations quickly or to find acceptable alternate work for the individual to perform during such an investigation. This is fair to the employee, as well as the management, as well as the American taxpayers. Rather than allowing indefinite leave, agencies will have to take disciplinary action against bad actors, which will serve to bring greater accountability to the Federal workforce.
The bill is also critical to protecting whistleblowers. The Office of Special Counsel, or the OSC, has a responsibility in the Federal Government to investigate potential reprisal and petition the Merit Systems Protection Board to stop retaliatory actions. However, being put on administrative leave does not constitute a personnel action that is reviewable by the OSC.
Thus, as long as a whistleblower is placed on administrative leave, he or she is left in limbo at the discretion of the agency with no right to appeal their status. Because of this, I believe that the bill before us, H.R. 4359, will go a long way to help reducing retaliation and protect whistleblowers by barring agencies from leaving employees on indefinite administrative leave.
Mr. Speaker, getting this legislation to the floor today, I am proud to say we have been able to work collaboratively in a bipartisan way. I particularly want to thank Mr. Lynch of Massachusetts for his passion on this issue and working with us. We incorporated some of those suggestions into the bill today.
We have altered the bill to give the agencies the option to extend the use of administrative leave beyond 14 days in discrete 30-day periods. Under these provisions, the agencies will be required to report to Congress after the use of the first 30-day extension, detailing why the extension is necessary, the stage of any investigation against the employee, the reasons the employee cannot return to the workplace, as well as other pertinent information.
Again, I want to thank Mr. Lynch for his work on this legislation. I believe that this is a stronger bill and more fair to the employees. I think it was an important step forward.
I thank Mr. Cummings, the committee as a whole, and the many members who were involved in getting the bill to this point today.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I urge the passage of H.R. 4359. We have worked in a good, bipartisan way. It is a good bill for the country and is good for the employees of the Federal Government.
I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source