BCMR Whistleblower retaliation

[kmaldonado26]

I have a question regarding BCMR appeals to the COFC. The CGBCMR is under investigation in my case for whistleblower retaliation by the House Committee on Homeland security and DHS OIG for unlawful retaliation a contaminating the process. The BCMR is refusing to issue a decision in my case and I have to appeal to federal court for my medical retirement or reinstatement case. Is there a known mechanism for what to do if the record correction body is under investigation for whistleblower retaliation. I am the cape may scandal whistleblower and there are a half dozer retaliation claims under investigation by the OIG as well as congress.

I am wondering If there is a clear path forward or would a court have to figure it out?

I can't get a fair ruling from people and administrative body under investigation.

would filing suit force the BCMR to issue a decision for the court to review or would I have to file under 14 USC 2507 and then File Suit?

My SVC JAG is under the belief that going to court alleging my right to a fair BCMR under 10 USC 1552 & 1034 have been violated as well as my 1st amendment right to petition my GOVT for redress of grievances (without being retaliated against) has also been violated.

Jack Gately originally recommended filing a BCMR first to build a record for the COFC. Now that the BCMR has contaminated the process per the OIG and the HOUSE DHS Committee Federal Court is certain.

Is there any precedent for a case like mine?

I see why Jack Gately told me to wait to hire an attorney until after the BCMR because my case is bullet proof and now im wondering if there is a definitive path that can be taken because the BCMR is trying to stall my case out. and with an open retaliation investigation against them nobody wants to give any decision on my case.

Is there any idea of what the COFC would do? (order a new BCMR to be empaneled, order the secretary and his delegate to handle it, or remand it the the current BCMR panel)

Lawmaker Wants Answers About Coast Guard's Sexual Assault Prosecutions Following Recruit Case

House Homeland Security Chair Rep. Bennie Thompson said the service's failure to investigate a 2018 report shows the service doesn't take allegations seriously.

www.military.com

Coast Guard Attorneys Will Decide on Prosecuting Sexual Assaults Beginning in December

The service announced changes to its policies that govern sexual assault prevention, response and recovery programs, limiting command influence and improving access to former members.

news.yahoo.com

Any ideas would be very helpful

Thanks V/R Ke'ha

 

[Provis]

I have a question regarding BCMR appeals to the COFC. The CGBCMR is under investigation in my case for whistleblower retaliation by the House Committee on Homeland security and DHS OIG for unlawful retaliation a contaminating the process. The BCMR is refusing to issue a decision in my case and I have to appeal to federal court for my medical retirement or reinstatement case. Is there a known mechanism for what to do if the record correction body is under investigation for whistleblower retaliation. I am the cape may scandal whistleblower and there are a half dozer retaliation claims under investigation by the OIG as well as congress.

I am wondering If there is a clear path forward or would a court have to figure it out?

I can't get a fair ruling from people and administrative body under investigation.

would filing suit force the BCMR to issue a decision for the court to review or would I have to file under 14 USC 2507 and then File Suit?

My SVC JAG is under the belief that going to court alleging my right to a fair BCMR under 10 USC 1552 & 1034 have been violated as well as my 1st amendment right to petition my GOVT for redress of grievances (without being retaliated against) has also been violated.

Jack Gately originally recommended filing a BCMR first to build a record for the COFC. Now that the BCMR has contaminated the process per the OIG and the HOUSE DHS Committee Federal Court is certain.

Is there any precedent for a case like mine?

I see why Jack Gately told me to wait to hire an attorney until after the BCMR because my case is bullet proof and now im wondering if there is a definitive path that can be taken because the BCMR is trying to stall my case out. and with an open retaliation investigation against them nobody wants to give any decision on my case.

Is there any idea of what the COFC would do? (order a new BCMR to be empaneled, order the secretary and his delegate to handle it, or remand it the the current BCMR panel)

Lawmaker Wants Answers About Coast Guard's Sexual Assault Prosecutions Following Recruit Case

House Homeland Security Chair Rep. Bennie Thompson said the service's failure to investigate a 2018 report shows the service doesn't take allegations seriously.

www.military.com

Coast Guard Attorneys Will Decide on Prosecuting Sexual Assaults Beginning in December

The service announced changes to its policies that govern sexual assault prevention, response and recovery programs, limiting command influence and improving access to former members.

news.yahoo.com

Any ideas would be very helpful

Thanks V/R Ke'ha

@RetiredAtty Any thoughts on this?

 

[seaairmariner]

Not to be a D-K, but I wish I knew how to report safely things in the Navy that were well F-kn me up, and get this much advocacy, before I even got out of bootcamp.

 

[RetiredAtty]

Petitions to the correction boards are permissive, not mandatory, and do not toll the 6 year statute of limitations on military pay or retired pay claims either at the US Court of Federal Claims or a US District Court. Filing first with a correction board is often prudent to develop the record, as a court is very likely to remand a case filed first in court without a board petition back to the board in any event. That being said, in a case like this it may be prudent to file a complaint to ensure that all rights are preserved and not lost due to a lapsed limitations period. The first issue to be addressed will be whether a remand is appropriate given the pendency of a CGBCMR petition, as a court is likely to stay or dismiss without prejudice a case if there is a pending application before a correction board the outcome of which may affect the case. See generally Wilt v. Gilmore, 62 Fed. App’x 484, 488-89 (4th Cir. 2003); McCarthy v. McPherson, 2020 WL 1852416, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 13, 2020). It is at this point that the various retaliation and other issues you raise would be litigated, with the argument being that remand is not appropriate because delaying judicial review would cause irreparable injury, if the agency is not competent to address the issue or to grant effective relief, or if further pursuit of an administrative remedy would be futile. See Adamski v. McHugh, 2015 WL 4624007, at *7 (D.D.C. July 31, 2015); see also Roe et al. v. Shanahan et al., 359 F.Supp.3d 382, 401-03 (E.D.Va. 2019) (court declined to apply an exhaustion requirement to HIV positive airmen seeking to enjoin their medical separation from the Air Force without first petitioning the AFBCMR, because the Air Force had a meaningful opportunity to examine its policies and decisions as plaintiffs presented their claims to a complex, tiered administrative review process—one that involved medical evaluations, written submissions, and formal hearings—culminating in an extensive administrative record and final written decisions by SAFPC; court also found that seeking relief at the AFBCMR was futile and would result in irreparable harm because both SAFPC and the AFBCMR act for the Secretary of the Air Force), aff'd sub nom. Roe v. Department of Defense, 947 F.3d 207 (4th Cir. 2020). Convincing a court that the CGBCMR or the USCG is acting in bad faith and is not competent to address your petition or grant effective relief is likely a long shot absent clearly compelling documentary evidence in an administrative record.

 

[kmaldonado26]

Thank you, I figured it depends. After the House DHS Committee deposes the BCMR I think I will have a good idea of what is going on. I don't see a court being able to look at my case and say that with the BCMR under investigation they will be able to handle my case properly.

 

[kmaldonado26]

In my case the CGBCMR acts for secretary Mayorkas and the BCMR being investigated makes him look bad so maybe that could apply. Think the biggest piece of evidence will be what the House comes out of their meeting with from the BCMR after they depose them.

 

[koxin222]

I’m circling back to this topic because I came across some info that might be relevant. When it comes to whistleblower retaliation, like in your case with the BCMR, I found this law firm’s site where similar cases are discussed—including what can happen when the process gets compromised or delayed. Might help clarify your legal options, especially if federal court is the next step.

 

[kmaldonado26]

I’m circling back to this topic because I came across some info that might be relevant. When it comes to whistleblower retaliation, like in your case with the BCMR, I found this law firm’s site where similar cases are discussed—including what can happen when the process gets compromised or delayed. Might help clarify your legal options, especially if federal court is the next step.

Thank you, I retained Jason Perry to handle the case in the COFC. I trust him to make the best decisions on how to handle it. He also found a cover up that was orchestrated by the BCMR so I am sure he will use that.

 

[Grenhep]

A business in Denver just switched to Asurint background checks to vet potential employees. The quick turnaround time of Asurint’s reports helps fill positions promptly. In one case, a candidate’s report showed a new misdemeanor that delayed the hiring decision. The company held back hiring until the matter was clarified. Asurint collects data from public records and other trusted databases. Some applicants have complained about outdated information appearing in their reports, making it more difficult to secure employment. Employers value Asurint’s detailed insights but demand more transparency regarding dispute resolutions. Privacy remains a priority as sensitive private data is processed. Asurint claims strict adherence to data protection regulations to keep information secure. Various states have different rules which complicate uniform background checks. Employers frequently request clearer explanations of Asurint’s screening methodology to guarantee fairness. Lawmakers are actively considering new regulations to improve background check transparency. Industry experts recommend continual improvements to Asurint’s accuracy and customer support. To learn more about Asurint background checks, see ig-tchad.org/asurint-background-check Employers should carefully review reports for discrepancies and quickly contact Asurint to address them. This maintains a balanced screening process. Applicants have the right to view and dispute their reports to correct inaccuracies. Keeping copies of reports is important for future reference. Asurint offers assistance to resolve disputes efficiently. Employers are encouraged to educate HR personnel on screening laws to reduce compliance risks. Applicants and employers benefit from open communication and transparency. Asurint allows clients to access reports online, simplifying the process. Fast, accurate background checks help companies hire trustworthy staff. A dependable screening provider like Asurint makes a positive impact on hiring quality.

 

[Grenhep]

A key process started for a applicant in Illinois as they submitted to a CIC background check. CIC delivers checks to help companies in recruiting safe employees. The candidate learned the procedure requires weeks to conclude. Employers like CIC lean on these checks to protect their teams. A CIC manager highlighted that these screenings ensure trust in hiring. The seeker experienced holdups affecting their start date. CIC obtains information from official archives for its screenings. Some applicants assert CIC should speed up the screening. The review covers criminal and job records. Candidates share concerns about the safety of their private data. CIC claims they comply to stringent laws to protect information. A seeker proposed CIC allow applicants to examine reports beforehand. The seeker organized records to speed up the process. Different state regulations influence CIC’s screening processes. Some businesses are recently demanding CIC to disclose their approach. Regulators are reviewing enhanced standards to improve screenings. Specialists contend CIC must refine its framework for candidates. The applicant hopes to begin work quickly. These reviews can create job opportunities. CIC provides assistance to address problems quickly. A efficient system continues to be crucial for candidates. To learn the essentials of CIC background checks, visit CIC background check details for a in-depth overview. Companies should carefully examine CIC reports for inaccuracies. If something appears off, they should notify CIC immediately. This guarantees a just system for everyone. Candidates can demand to see their CIC report if necessary. They can amend any erroneous data they find. Keeping a copy can serve as helpful down the line. CIC provides help to fix issues promptly. Employers should inform their team on screening rules. This can prevent problems in the future. Applicants should acquaint themselves with their entitlements regarding CIC checks. Openness builds trust for everyone.