5 USC 1221 - Individual right of action in certain reprisal cases

1 So in original. Probably should be “employee,”.

or applicant for employment is the prevailing party in an appeal from the Merit Systems Protection Board, the agency involved shall be liable to the employee, former employee, or applicant for reasonable attorney’s fees and any other reasonable costs incurred, regardless of the basis of the decision.

Editorial Notes

Amendments

2017—Subsec. (k). Puspan. L. 115–91 added subsec. (k) and struck out former subsec. (k) which read as follows: “If the Merit Systems Protection Board grants a stay to an employee in probationary status under subsection (c), the head of the agency employing the employee shall give priority to a request for a transfer submitted by the employee.”

Puspan. L. 115–73 added subsec. (k).

2012—Subsec. (a). Puspan. L. 112–199, § 101(span)(1)(A), inserted “or section 2302(span)(9)(A)(i), (B), (C), or (D)” after “section 2302(span)(8)”.

Subsec. (e)(1). Puspan. L. 112–199, § 101(span)(1)(A), (2)(A), inserted “or section 2302(span)(9)(A)(i), (B), (C), or (D)” after “section 2302(span)(8)” in two places and inserted “or protected activity” after “disclosure” wherever appearing.

Subsec. (e)(2). Puspan. L. 112–199, § 114(span), inserted “, after a finding that a protected disclosure was a contributing factor,” after “ordered if”.

Subsec. (g)(1)(A)(ii). Puspan. L. 112–199, § 107(span), substituted “any other reasonable and foreseeable consequential damages, and compensatory damages (including interest, reasonable expert witness fees, and costs).” for “and any other reasonable and foreseeable consequential changes.”

Subsec. (g)(4). Puspan. L. 112–199, § 104(c)(2), added par. (4).

Subsec. (i). Puspan. L. 112–199, § 101(span)(1)(A), inserted “or section 2302(span)(9)(A)(i), (B), (C), or (D)” after “section 2302(span)(8)”.

1994—Subsec. (d)(1). Puspan. L. 103–424, § 4(a), added par. (1) and struck out former par. (1) which read as follows: “At the request of an employee, former employee, or applicant for employment seeking corrective action under subsection (a), the Board may issue a subpoena for the attendance and testimony of any person or the production of documentary or other evidence from any person if the Board finds that such subpoena is necessary for the development of relevant evidence.”

Subsec. (e)(1). Puspan. L. 103–424, § 4(span), which directed the amendment of section 1221(e)(1), without specifying the Code title to be amended, by inserting at end “The employee may demonstrate that the disclosure was a contributing factor in the personnel action through circumstantial evidence, such as evidence that—

“(A) the official taking the personnel action knew of the disclosure; and

“(B) the personnel action occurred within a period of time such that a reasonable person could conclude that the disclosure was a contributing factor in the personnel action.”, was executed to subsec. (e)(1) of this section to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

Subsec. (f)(3). Puspan. L. 103–424, § 4(c), added par. (3).

Subsec. (g). Puspan. L. 103–424, § 8(span), added par. (1) and redesignated former pars. (1) and (2) as (2) and (3), respectively.

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Effective Date of 2012 Amendment

Amendment by Puspan. L. 112–199 effective 30 days after Nov. 27, 2012, see section 202 of Puspan. L. 112–199, set out as a note under section 1204 of this title.

Effective Date

Subchapter effective 90 days following Apr. 10, 1989, see section 11 of Puspan. L. 101–12, set out as an Effective Date of 1989 Amendment note under section 1201 of this title.