Anonymous wrote:She hasn't done anything wrong yet, because she's still on leave, correct? She's talking a big game but I bet she shows up eventually or else quits / gets an RA. The chances she has her supervisor on board as described are almost zero.

It's annoying she's running her mouth, but right now that's all it is. Stay out of her drama.

No, this employee has been living outside of DC area for multiple years, even before starting this current leave.
That is impermissible.

Not the same agency but I know of multiple employees who worked with my friend, who did not live in DC area but were collecting DC pay due to some agreement that they would come into the office 2 days per pay period, which they never actually did for several years. I don’t think that was kosher to begin with and especially not since they weren’t even ever coming in, but I’m not aware of what mechanism would have ensured this never happened.

I hate that this stuff was allowed to happen.

My guess is she has or is getting an RA for some medical reason she doesn’t want to discuss. But instead of just being a mature adult who says I have a medical accommodation or maybe because she’s a bragger, she’s spinning this whole thing of oh my supervisor is looking the other way for me NBD. You still have to do 5 day RTO poor you.

But I agree with others the problem won’t be the RTO/RA as much as taking DC locality while not living in DC for a job with an explicit 60 mile requirement. If she has told this to her supervisor or if they strongly suspect it, I think they have to elevate it so HR/IT can confirm it because that’s government money going out the door. It may not be tomorrow but at some point, she’ll be paying that money back so hope she’s saving up.

What someone tells you on the phone isn't always what actually happens with their supervisor, especially if someone wants to keep medical conditions private in a gossipy work place. If she's just boasting or lying to you but has an interim RA signed off by her supervisor then you're well on your way to being involved in a lot of complaints/investigations. I find it very hard to believe a supervisor in this environment just signs off on obvious fraud.

Anonymous wrote:Whatever happens, do not lie.

If asked about her presence in the office, speak narrowly and honestly to whether you yourself have seen her in the building or not seen her in the building.

Not only that, I’d report it to your OIG. I wouldn’t be risking my own job over someone who decides rules don’t apply to them and who may be committing fraud, waste or abuse. Employees have reporting obligations.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you suspect this person is an actual fraud who doesn't do anything, report her to the inspector general.

They'll probably get her exclusively on claiming DMV locality pay while living outside the area.

I've been reading the IG reports from my own agency, and that's pretty much the sole basis on which bad apples are pushed out. That, and running your own business during working hours, using the printers to print hundreds of flyers or something.

+1. Submit an OIG complaint on her. The big issue is that if she’s living in the Midwest she’s being paid DC locality pay. That’s fraud. Im dealing with something similar regarding paternity leave. I transferred agencies last Fall and the week before I started, an employee got the acting supervisor to sign off on intermittent paternity leave to be used over 6 months in conjunction with full time telework. It was a recipe for disaster as the employee would pop online for 20-30 minutes at a time, stretched out their leave for 6 months vs 12 weeks and avoided RTO for several months. It caused a lot of issues because it was clear that the employee was not pulling their weight and created a mess for me.

Not fraud and not similar. Just because you don't like somebody's approved leave plan doesn't make the plan illegal.

NP. Are you a fed? Because this is fraud. We receive COLAs based on where we live. If you're lying about it, it can be a 15-40k difference in pay. That definitely is fraud. For tax purposes you have to have your home address correct. Our timesheets also have a column for telework. If she's not indicating that she's teleworking daily, that too is timesheet fraud.

Over the decades I've been a fed, I've seen cases like this. The lowest punishment is repaying all the money and a 5-10 day suspension, the highest punishment is instant firing. Supervisors also get reprimanded.

The PP did not say their employee is living out of the area.

The person OP is mad about (different person) may never have lived in the area, which would be fraud if that's actually the case. But it could also be true that they have a DC residence - including living with a relative - and happen to be spending their maternity leave with family somewhere else, which is not "living outside the area." OP is probably not in a position to know where this person files her taxes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you suspect this person is an actual fraud who doesn't do anything, report her to the inspector general.

They'll probably get her exclusively on claiming DMV locality pay while living outside the area.

I've been reading the IG reports from my own agency, and that's pretty much the sole basis on which bad apples are pushed out. That, and running your own business during working hours, using the printers to print hundreds of flyers or something.

+1. Submit an OIG complaint on her. The big issue is that if she’s living in the Midwest she’s being paid DC locality pay. That’s fraud. Im dealing with something similar regarding paternity leave. I transferred agencies last Fall and the week before I started, an employee got the acting supervisor to sign off on intermittent paternity leave to be used over 6 months in conjunction with full time telework. It was a recipe for disaster as the employee would pop online for 20-30 minutes at a time, stretched out their leave for 6 months vs 12 weeks and avoided RTO for several months. It caused a lot of issues because it was clear that the employee was not pulling their weight and created a mess for me.

Not fraud and not similar. Just because you don't like somebody's approved leave plan doesn't make the plan illegal.

So I was hired as the employee’s supervisor and yes, I had serious doubts as to whether they were teleworking during their intermittent leave since they would be away on teams and non-responsive to emails. Yes, I did follow up and am continuing to address performance and leave issues with the employee. It’s similar because it’s an entitled attitude.

If you think they aren't working when they say they are, that's a performance issue that you have the tools to address. It's nothing to do with using their parental leave intermittently, which is allowed, and nothing to do with locality pay. The OIG would not get involved.

Employees are entitled to use their leave and any permissible schedule flexibilities. Both your post and OP's are full of anger at people actually using the parental leave benefit. But parental leave is (a) not fraud or an issue of "not pulling their weight," and (b) such a tiny fraction of somebody's 30-year career. I mean really, you're mad about a mere 6 months? Maybe a year between 2 kids? That's nothing, and I say that as somebody who had kids before there was federal parental leave.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you suspect this person is an actual fraud who doesn't do anything, report her to the inspector general.

They'll probably get her exclusively on claiming DMV locality pay while living outside the area.

I've been reading the IG reports from my own agency, and that's pretty much the sole basis on which bad apples are pushed out. That, and running your own business during working hours, using the printers to print hundreds of flyers or something.

+1. Submit an OIG complaint on her. The big issue is that if she’s living in the Midwest she’s being paid DC locality pay. That’s fraud. Im dealing with something similar regarding paternity leave. I transferred agencies last Fall and the week before I started, an employee got the acting supervisor to sign off on intermittent paternity leave to be used over 6 months in conjunction with full time telework. It was a recipe for disaster as the employee would pop online for 20-30 minutes at a time, stretched out their leave for 6 months vs 12 weeks and avoided RTO for several months. It caused a lot of issues because it was clear that the employee was not pulling their weight and created a mess for me.

Not fraud and not similar. Just because you don't like somebody's approved leave plan doesn't make the plan illegal.

So I was hired as the employee’s supervisor and yes, I had serious doubts as to whether they were teleworking during their intermittent leave since they would be away on teams and non-responsive to emails. Yes, I did follow up and am continuing to address performance and leave issues with the employee. It’s similar because it’s an entitled attitude.

I've dealt with cases like this. HR with IT's help can quickly pull telework logs and see if they match their timesheets. Everything you mentioned deserves a reprimand or a PIP, don't think it's too minor to take to HR. Don't get yourself in hot water as a supervisor by not reporting things like this. The new DOGE performance evaluations they're rolling out will have a whole critical element for supervisors about dealing with employees performance and conduct.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you suspect this person is an actual fraud who doesn't do anything, report her to the inspector general.

They'll probably get her exclusively on claiming DMV locality pay while living outside the area.

I've been reading the IG reports from my own agency, and that's pretty much the sole basis on which bad apples are pushed out. That, and running your own business during working hours, using the printers to print hundreds of flyers or something.

+1. Submit an OIG complaint on her. The big issue is that if she’s living in the Midwest she’s being paid DC locality pay. That’s fraud. Im dealing with something similar regarding paternity leave. I transferred agencies last Fall and the week before I started, an employee got the acting supervisor to sign off on intermittent paternity leave to be used over 6 months in conjunction with full time telework. It was a recipe for disaster as the employee would pop online for 20-30 minutes at a time, stretched out their leave for 6 months vs 12 weeks and avoided RTO for several months. It caused a lot of issues because it was clear that the employee was not pulling their weight and created a mess for me.

Not fraud and not similar. Just because you don't like somebody's approved leave plan doesn't make the plan illegal.

NP. Are you a fed? Because this is fraud. We receive COLAs based on where we live. If you're lying about it, it can be a 15-40k difference in pay. That definitely is fraud. For tax purposes you have to have your home address correct. Our timesheets also have a column for telework. If she's not indicating that she's teleworking daily, that too is timesheet fraud.

Over the decades I've been a fed, I've seen cases like this. The lowest punishment is repaying all the money and a 5-10 day suspension, the highest punishment is instant firing. Supervisors also get reprimanded.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you suspect this person is an actual fraud who doesn't do anything, report her to the inspector general.

They'll probably get her exclusively on claiming DMV locality pay while living outside the area.

I've been reading the IG reports from my own agency, and that's pretty much the sole basis on which bad apples are pushed out. That, and running your own business during working hours, using the printers to print hundreds of flyers or something.

+1. Submit an OIG complaint on her. The big issue is that if she’s living in the Midwest she’s being paid DC locality pay. That’s fraud. Im dealing with something similar regarding paternity leave. I transferred agencies last Fall and the week before I started, an employee got the acting supervisor to sign off on intermittent paternity leave to be used over 6 months in conjunction with full time telework. It was a recipe for disaster as the employee would pop online for 20-30 minutes at a time, stretched out their leave for 6 months vs 12 weeks and avoided RTO for several months. It caused a lot of issues because it was clear that the employee was not pulling their weight and created a mess for me.

Not fraud and not similar. Just because you don't like somebody's approved leave plan doesn't make the plan illegal.

So I was hired as the employee’s supervisor and yes, I had serious doubts as to whether they were teleworking during their intermittent leave since they would be away on teams and non-responsive to emails. Yes, I did follow up and am continuing to address performance and leave issues with the employee. It’s similar because it’s an entitled attitude.

Do the FDAs timesheets require you to certify location? I’m at a different agency and for each day you put in whether the time was in office or telework. Now w 5 day RTO, there’s only ad hoc so if for 2 wks in a row you fill all days teleworked, HR will catch on quick. If you decide just don’t specify location and let it look like all 10 days were in office — in order to certify your supervisor would have to lie for you and I’m unclear why they’d do that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you suspect this person is an actual fraud who doesn't do anything, report her to the inspector general.

They'll probably get her exclusively on claiming DMV locality pay while living outside the area.

I've been reading the IG reports from my own agency, and that's pretty much the sole basis on which bad apples are pushed out. That, and running your own business during working hours, using the printers to print hundreds of flyers or something.

+1. Submit an OIG complaint on her. The big issue is that if she’s living in the Midwest she’s being paid DC locality pay. That’s fraud. Im dealing with something similar regarding paternity leave. I transferred agencies last Fall and the week before I started, an employee got the acting supervisor to sign off on intermittent paternity leave to be used over 6 months in conjunction with full time telework. It was a recipe for disaster as the employee would pop online for 20-30 minutes at a time, stretched out their leave for 6 months vs 12 weeks and avoided RTO for several months. It caused a lot of issues because it was clear that the employee was not pulling their weight and created a mess for me.

Not fraud and not similar. Just because you don't like somebody's approved leave plan doesn't make the plan illegal.

This is not your problem, OP. What you’re talking about hasn’t even happened yet. Don’t use your mental energy and anxiety worrying about what this other woman does with her life. Worst case scenario she gets fired again, and she got a few extra months out of the deal.

Anonymous wrote:If you suspect this person is an actual fraud who doesn't do anything, report her to the inspector general.

They'll probably get her exclusively on claiming DMV locality pay while living outside the area.

I've been reading the IG reports from my own agency, and that's pretty much the sole basis on which bad apples are pushed out. That, and running your own business during working hours, using the printers to print hundreds of flyers or something.

+1. Submit an OIG complaint on her. The big issue is that if she’s living in the Midwest she’s being paid DC locality pay. That’s fraud. Im dealing with something similar regarding paternity leave. I transferred agencies last Fall and the week before I started, an employee got the acting supervisor to sign off on intermittent paternity leave to be used over 6 months in conjunction with full time telework. It was a recipe for disaster as the employee would pop online for 20-30 minutes at a time, stretched out their leave for 6 months vs 12 weeks and avoided RTO for several months. It caused a lot of issues because it was clear that the employee was not pulling their weight and created a mess for me.

Whatever happens, do not lie.

If asked about her presence in the office, speak narrowly and honestly to whether you yourself have seen her in the building or not seen her in the building.

Anonymous wrote:If her supervisor is aware, her supervisor will also be reprimanded for this. Possibly the supervisor would be reprimanded anyways for not knowing. They should be aware of basic employee information.

Our IT does random vpn scans that caught this during covid.

That's why I'm skeptical of the claim she's not living where she said she was - not that it never happens, but because there are systems set up to catch it and they work.

Sadly it's not uncommon for somebody like OP to get big mad about "fraud" but when you point out their obligation to report fraud, suddenly they don’t have proof or "it might be ok on paper but it shouldn't be" or whatever. Either report it or stop throwing around accusations.