On April 23, 2012, representatives from the Veterans Administration (VA) Office of Inspector General (OIG) and former employee from the VA hospital in Manchester testified before the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee about a recent report that showed that the VA inflated its success rate in treating veterans with mental health needs. The report included testimony from Nicholas Tolentino, a former mental health administrator, who said that the VA culture encourages administrators to game performance metrics and tamper with results of VA-wide surveys.

Tolentino and a panel of VA officials discussed the findings of the IG report, which showed that the VA overstated how quickly it serves veterans in need of mental healthcare. The report revealed that in 2011, only forty-nine percent of all new patients received a full mental health evaluation within the department’s required time period of fourteen days, but the VA’s 2011 Performance and Accountability Report stated that ninety-five percent had received the evaluation within the required time period. In addition, the investigation found that only sixty-four percent of patients began treatment within 14 days of their desired start date, while the VA reported that 95 percent had done so.

Chair of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee Senator Patty Murray had originally requested the IG investigation, and she called the report “substantial and troubling.” In response, William Schoenhard, VA Deputy Undersecretary for Health for Operations and Management, said the VA concurs with the IG’s findings and has instituted a number of changes to address the issues.  “The explanations for the [IG’s] findings are varied, none are satisfactory — we must do more to deliver the mental health services that veterans need,” Schoenhard said.

The VA announced that it will hire 1,900 mental health care staff members, including 1,600 practitioners. In addition, the Agency will also hire family therapists and mental health counselors. The VA is also conducting an extensive internal review of its mental health operations has promised to take proper action to address the concerns raised in the IG’s report.

The Employment Law Group® law firm has an extensive nationwide whistleblower practice representing employees who have been victims of retaliation for reporting fraud or improper practices.

On January 31, 2012, investigators from the Office of Special Counsel reported that Air Force officials at the Dover military mortuary unlawfully punished four civilian workers who reported numerous incidents in which the mortuary mishandled deceased soldiers’ remains. The whistleblowers, who included mortuary inspectors and embalming and autopsy technicians, alleged that their supervisors retaliated against them for disclosing to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) that mortuary workers mishandled soldiers’ body parts. Employees who reported these matters to the OSC were issued five day suspensions, placed on indefinite administrative leave, or terminated.

Based on the employees’ reports, the Office of Special Counsel conducted an initial investigation in November and found that the mortuary had engaged in “gross mismanagement”, where it misplaced body parts of troops killed in Afghanistan. The Air Force acknowledged that it punished the three supervisors who were responsible for the facility’s mishandling remains, but it did not discipline the supervisors who retaliated against those who had reported their wrongdoing. The Office of Special Counsel then began a separate investigation under the Whistleblower Protection Act to look into the whistleblowers’ retaliation claims.

Secretary of the Air Force Michael Donley has taken action based on the results of the latest investigation.  Donley reported on that he had appointed a two-star general to review the specific findings and take “appropriate action.”

“There is no place for reprisal in the Air Force. Reprisals against employees are unethical and illegal and counter to Air Force core values,” stated Donley.

The Employment Law Group® law firm has an extensive nationwide whistleblower practice representing employees who have been victims of retaliation.

On January 11, 2011 the Air Forces Times featured The Employment Law Group® law firm principal attorney Dave Scher in a story regarding recent whistle-blowing by U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) physicians.

The story has since been featured in other Gannet Government Media publications including the Army Times, Navy Times, Marine Corps Times, and Military Times.  In addition, the article was mentioned on the Government Accountability Project’s (GAP) Daily Whistleblower News blog.

Cover of January 16, 2011 print edition of Air Force Times

The Air Force Times and the other Gannet publications are weekly newspapers that serve active, reserve, and retired members of the U.S. military and their families by providing news and analysis that is relevant to members of the military community.  The newspapers are among the most widely purchased publications on U.S. military bases and other military installations and, together, have an average weekly circulation of over 240,000.

The article highlighted a current case that arose following allegations that a whistleblower was fired from a VA facility in Northport, New York after complaining about unsafe patient practices and hazardous working conditions. The Employment Law Group® law firm attorney Dave Scher noted that the U.S. Office of Special Counsel substantiated the allegations and that “the special counsel herself went out of her way to praise [the whistleblower’s] courage in a press release.”

The article also profiled other cases in which The Employment Law Group® law firm has advocated for whistleblowers’ rights by assisting VA doctors who claim that “they were fired or harassed for speaking out about problems affecting patient care”.  In these cases, said Scher, the “former healthcare professionals attempted to point out the dangers patients were facing at VA medical facilities.”

“How such rampant disregard for regulations and respect for patients took place is a travesty.  The whistleblowers are stepping forward to protect these patients’ rights as well as their own.”

The original article, entitled “Whistle-blowers Sue VA, Claim Reprisal”, appeared in the January 16, 2012 print edition of the Air Force Times.

The Employment Law Group® law firm has an extensive nationwide whistleblower practice  representing employees who have been victims of retaliation.

Last week the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Virginia-based container shipper, Maersk Line Ltd., and its Denmark-based affiliate, Maersk Line, entered into a settlement agreement in which Maersk will pay the federal government nearly $32 million to resolve allegations that the companies submitted false claims involving cargo shipments to U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The DOJ brought the suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California under the whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA). The suit was initially filed in 2004 against another shipping firm, American President Lines (APL), by its former employee, Jerry H. Brown. In 2007 the suit was amended to include Maersk as a defendant.

APL agreed to settle the suit with the government for $26.3 million in 2009 with the whistleblower, Mr. Brown, receiving $5.19 million. Mr. Brown is entitled to $3.6 million of the current settlement with Maersk.

According to the allegations, the companies “inaccurately billed the U.S. military for certain…services rendered during war-time conditions in Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan.” Specifically, the DOJ alleged that Maersk “knowingly overcharged the Department of Defense to transport thousands of containers from ports to inland delivery” and that Maersk “inflated its invoices in various ways” including overcharging the government.

Maersk attorney, James Philbin, claims that “once Maersk became aware of the allegations [it] commenced an extensive internal review…and voluntarily disclosed these findings” to the government.

U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California, Melinda Haag, noted that “contractors that submit false claims for monies they are not owed cost the government millions of dollars every year,”  and that this settlement “should send a strong signal that the government is committed to safeguarding taxpayer funds by ensuring that contractors operate ethically and responsibly.”

Earlier this month, the Navy Department in charge of security clearances reinstated the top secret security clearance of Franz Gayl, a civilian science and technology advisor for the Marine Corps. Gayl was placed on administrative leave for criticizing military leaders and allegedly stealing classified information. According to the Associated Press:

Beginning in 2007, Gayl accused the Marine Corps of gross mismanagement for failing to answer the call in 2005 for heavy-duty trucks called MRAPs (M-raps) that could withstand roadside bombs in Iraq. The trucks would eventually be delivered in large numbers to all of the military services and were credited with saving thousands of lives. Gayl also said requests from commanders in the field for other key technologies that could help troops disperse crowds and detect explosives were slow to be delivered because of flaws in the acquisition system and internal disputes over money.

Gayl was harassed and retaliated against by his supervisors, including being accused of stealing Marine Corps property, after coming forward with his allegations. Gayl’s supervisors accused him of inserting an unsecured flash drive into his work computer without authorization. However, there were no witnesses or evidence that he did any of the acts of which he is accused. In October 2010, the Marine Corp suspended Gayl’s security clearance and placed him on paid administrative leave, facing indefinite suspension.

Earlier this month, a Navy Department office in charge of security clearance determinations reinstated Gayl’s top secret security clearance, which voided his suspension and allowed him to return to work.

On November 19, 2009, the Department of Defense (DoD) issued an interim rule implementing the whistleblower protection provisions of the National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 2008 and 2009.   The rule clarifies the scope of protected conduct, sets forth procedures governing Inspector General investigations, and clarifies the removal provision under which a whistleblower can obtain de novo review in federal district court.

For information on The Employment Law Group® law firm’s Whistleblower Practice, click here.

A new report released by the Center for Public Integrity (CPI) reveals that the number of DoD referrals to the Justice Department for contracting fraud and corruption cases have decreased drastically since 1993.  According to the report, the Justice Department has received 76% fewer cases in fiscal year 2008 compared to fiscal year 1993, despite the upsurge in defense contracting ($200 billion in 1993 compared to nearly $400 billion in 2008).  The CPI attributes the low number of referrals to a number of factors, including shifting priorities, workload increases, and the declining manpower and expertise in the DoD Office of Inspector General (OIG).  According to the report, these problems are not unique to the OIG.  The number of prosecutions of cases involving defense contracting fraud has also decreased since the Clinton administration due to the lack of “personnel to detect, investigate, prosecute and deter criminal activity impacting DoD.”  The good news is that the existing problems are being addressed.  Efforts to increase oversight and accountability in the DoD and Justice Department, include:

• Examining the government’s work in combating fraud and determining whether it is sufficient to catch and deter wrongdoing;
• Reviewing and improving government contracting rules;
• Improving coordination among government investigators; and
• Providing specialized training for agents and prosecutors on procurement fraud.

For more information about procurement fraud and The Employment Law Group® law firm’s Whistleblower Practice, click here.

An investigation conducted by the Associated Press reveals that in the past six years, more than 90 percent of Department of Defense (“DoD”) whistleblower retaliation cases have been dismissed by the Inspector General’s office.  According to a study by the Associated Press, DoD investigators believe that many legitimate whistleblower claims are prematurely dismissed because of a demoralized work environment in the Military Reprisal Investigations (“MRI”) unit of the Inspector General’s office.  According to a government survey conducted by the Corporate Leadership Council, only five percent of MRI personnel take whistleblower complaints seriously.  The Employment Law Group® law firm is hopeful that a new administration will change the culture at DoD IG and protect DoD whistleblowers.

The Employment Law Group® law firm routinely represents DoD whistleblowers in retaliation cases.  For more information about The Employment Law Group® law firm’s whistleblower practice, click here.