Sidney Wyche appealed the Postal Service’s August 20, 2005 decision to remove him from his position as a mail processing clerk at the Baton Rouge, Louisiana Processing and Distribution Center. The Postal Service removed Wyche for “failure to follow instructions.”

Wyche had refused to perform work on a Delivery Bar Code Sorter (DBCS) machine, claiming that working alone on the machine violated his doctor’s instructions. He also refused to participate in the reasonable accommodation process. The Court found that the employee never responded to the Postal Service’s requests seeking clarification of his condition or provided evidence of a medical condition or disability. The Court affirmed the removal as the proper exercise of the Postal Service’s discretion.

The Merit System Protection Board found that “Mr. Wyche: (1) did not to follow instructions to operate the DBCS machine alone when doing a “first pass” or when mail volume was low; (2) did not identify any specific safety procedure that was violated by the instructions he refused to follow; and (3) though offered multiple opportunities to submit medical evidence of some condition or disability that would prevent him from performing his assigned duties, did not submit medical evidence that he required an accommodation.

The Board concluded the “Postal Service did not discriminate on the basis of disability, as Mr. Wyche did not establish he was a “qualified individual with a disability” pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(g).  The Board also concluded that the Agency complied with the union contract or a settlement agreement, which clearly states that staffing the DCBS machine with one person during limited volume, i.e. low volume or “first pass,” is proper. It also found Mr. Wyche’s removal proper, as employee misconduct is left to the sound discretion of the agency and that the Agency gave due and proper consideration to the factors set out in Douglas v. Veterans’ Administration, 5 M.S.P.R. 280, 306 (1981).”

“An employee does not have an unfettered right to disregard an order merely because there is substantial reason to believe that the order is not proper. The employee must first comply with the order and then register his complaint or grievance, except in limited circumstances where obedience would place the employee in a clearly dangerous situation. Thus, the Board’s ruling is in accordance with the law and supported by substantial evidence. Accordingly, this court affirms.”
 Wyche v. U.S. Postal Service - C.A.Fed.2006-PDF