The full Board at the MSPB reinstated a claim of whistlblower retaliation against the Navy that one of the MSPB's Administrative Judges had dismissed.

The claim against the Navy was filed by a fed who is a Dispatcher at Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center. He claimed, among other things, that he had been denied overtime pay in retaliation for his disclosure.

Initially, the MSPB's Administrative Judge dismissed the fed's claim on the ground that his disclosure did not meet the technical definition of "whistleblowing."

The Administrative Judge also questioned whether the disclosure was a "contributing factor" that led to the actions the employee was challenging. The Administrative Judge's decision was also particularly hard on the fed, who had attempted to file his claim without the assistance of an attorney, stating that the fed's filings were "largely rambling and, generally, incomprehensible."

On appeal, the full Board at the MSPB noted that the fed disclosed to the U.S. Marine Corps Criminal Investigative Division that his supervisor had misused government property.

Specifically, the fed reported his supervisor for allegedly using government vehicles for personal purposes on several occasions and for using the government credit card for gas on these occasions.

In fact, the Criminal Investigative Division's report indicated that the supervisor admitted to this misconduct during its investigation.

The full Board found that this was, indeed, a whistleblowing disclosure. The Board also found that a reasonable person could infer that the disclosure was a "contributing factor" in Navy's decision to deny the fed overtime pay.

Accordingly, the Board reinstated the fed's claim and remanded the case to the Administrative Judge for a hearing to determine whether the disclosure did actually contribute to the denial of overtime pay.

Case is: Taylor v. Navy, Docket No. SF-1221-05-0491-W-1 (2006)