Federal workers not entitled to COVID hazard pay -U.S. appeals court
Send a link to a friend
[February 15, 2023]
By Jonathan Stempel
(Reuters) - A divided U.S. appeals court on Tuesday said federal workers
are generally not entitled to extra pay for being exposed to COVID-19
through their jobs.
In a 10-2 decision with potentially "far-reaching" ramifications, the
U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against 188 current and
former correctional employees at a federal prison in Danbury,
Connecticut.
The employees said they deserved hazardous duty and environmental
differential pay because they worked with or in close proximity to
people, objects and surfaces infected with COVID-19, and were not
wearing sufficient protective gear.
But the appeals court said the government's Office of Personnel
Management, the human resources agency for more than 2.1 million federal
workers, had no regulations affording extra pay for exposure in most
settings to contagious diseases.
It said exceptions covered some laboratories and tropical jungles, and
that it was up to Congress or the agency to add categories.
"COVID-19 is a serious national and international health concern, and
the potential ramifications of this case are far-reaching and cut across
the entire federal workforce," Circuit Judge Raymond Chen wrote.
"We conclude that OPM simply has not addressed contagious-disease
transmission (e.g., human-to-human, or through human-contaminated
intermediary objects or surfaces)" in most settings, he added. "That is
not to say that such differential pay may not be warranted."
[to top of second column]
|
Emergency room doctor Jim Keany treats
patient a in the Emergency room at Providence Mission Hospital in
Mission Viejo, California, U.S., January 27, 2022. REUTERS/Shannon
Stapleton
Circuit Judge Jimmie Reyna
dissented, saying the prison employees plausibly alleged they
deserved extra pay for exposure to "unusually" hazardous conditions.
"The COVID-19 pandemic adversely affected our workplaces, schools,
airlines, hotels, meat-packing houses, and hospitals," Reyna wrote.
"Even courthouses were momentarily shuttered on the premise that
COVID-19 was in the streets roaring like a lion. We cannot shake off
those experiences like dust from a rug."
Molly Elkin, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in an email: "Sadly,
the majority was motivated by fear of the floodgates.... We are
exploring all options available to get our brave correctional
officers the hazard pay they deserve for working in a crowded prison
- a Petri dish for COVID-19."
OPM did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Tuesday's decision upheld a February 2021 ruling by a federal Court
of Claims judge.
The decision is Adams et al v U.S., U.S. Federal Circuit Court of
Appeals, No. 2021-1662.
(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Marguerita
Choy)
[© 2023 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |