A retaliatory act may not fire a complaining employee in reprisal. What exactly does this mean?

CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana — Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:04:04 -0500

How is this employed under the regulations in our uniformed services?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 10 at 2020 11:18 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:18:10 -0500

on one side most of us can't be fired, but there is whistleblower protections to negate reprisal for complaints.

Response by SFC James Cameron made Feb 10 at 2020 11:22 AM

SFC James Cameron — Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:22:42 -0500

The definitions you seek are in Army Directive 2014-20 and AR 600-20. Army Directive 2014-20 also defines Personnel Action.

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Feb 10 at 2020 1:01 PM

MCPO Roger Collins — Mon, 10 Feb 2020 13:01:25 -0500

Don’t know if this helps, also there is a False Claims Act that comes into play.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/932

10 U.S. Code § 932 - Art. 132. Retaliation

Amendment by Pub. L. 115–91 effective immediately after the amendments made by div. E (§§5001–5542) of Pub. L. 114–328 take effect as provided for in section 5542 of that Act (10 U.S.C. 801 note), see section 1081(c)(4) of Pub. L. 115–91, set out as a note under section 801 of this title.

Response by Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin made Feb 10 at 2020 2:24 PM

Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin — Mon, 10 Feb 2020 14:24:24 -0500

If this is in reference to LTC Vindman, he wasn't exactly fired. He's still employed by the US Army. However, he also lost the trust of those within the NSC and the President. Why keep him there? Why would he want to be there? Time for him to move on.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Feb 10 at 2020 8:09 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Mon, 10 Feb 2020 20:09:53 -0500

During my career I was told very powerful people can be vindictive and to tread lightly.

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Feb 11 at 2020 9:16 PM

LtCol Robert Quinter — Tue, 11 Feb 2020 21:16:35 -0500

Flag Officers are constantly relieving Officers under their command for lack of confidence because the relieved officer does not meet their standards for filling the position in question. O-6s and below, if they cannot convince their senior to remove an individual from a billet will normally reassign the individual to some nondescript position where they feel the individual can do no harm. If you are referring to Vindman, he has just been reassigned. Everyone on the President's staff other than lower GS people hold their position at the pleasure of the President and were I in Trump's position I would have done the same thing. Why any Lieutenant Colonel feels the President somehow erred because the President didn't feel limited to using the LtCol's specific talking points has a greatly exaggerated ego.