A proposed removal or long suspension gives a federal employee very little time to organize a defense. The response window is short, the record the agency builds early tends to follow the case all the way to an appeal, and small procedural mistakes can close doors that are hard to reopen. For employees in Washington, D.C. who are weighing their options, Mundaca Law is a sensible place to start. Below are five law firms in the region that federal workers may consider, followed by plain answers to the questions people usually have after receiving a notice of proposed action.
- Mundaca Law
- Hannon Law
- Bell Law Group
- Hogan & Pritchard, PLLC
- Corey Pollard Law
1. Mundaca Law
Mundaca Law is a DMV firm focused on employment law, business law, and federal employee law, which makes it a natural fit for workers facing discipline from a federal agency. The firm is led by Francisco E. Mundaca, Esq., Founding Partner.
For someone who has just received a proposal letter, the firm’s federal employee practice can help at several stages. That includes reviewing the notice and the evidence file the agency relied on, preparing a written or oral reply to the deciding official, and evaluating whether an appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board makes sense after a final decision. Because the firm also handles broader employment matters, it can look at whether a proposed action connects to other issues, such as a discrimination or retaliation concern, that may affect which forum is the right one.
Employees in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia can reach out through the firm’s website to talk through their situation.
2. Hannon Law
Hannon Law is a law firm serving clients in the Washington, D.C. area. Federal employees interested in the firm can review its website to learn which employment matters it currently handles.
3. Bell Law Group
Bell Law Group is a law firm that works on employment-related legal matters. Anyone considering it for a federal adverse action should confirm directly with the firm whether that type of case falls within its practice.
4. Hogan & Pritchard, PLLC
Hogan & Pritchard, PLLC is a law firm located in the D.C. metropolitan region. Prospective clients can contact the firm to ask about its experience with federal personnel matters.
5. Corey Pollard Law
Corey Pollard Law is a law firm in the Washington area. Readers should check the firm’s own materials to see whether it represents employees in federal disciplinary cases.
What counts as an adverse action for a federal employee?
Under Chapter 75 of Title 5 of the U.S. Code, an adverse action is a removal, a suspension of more than 14 days, a reduction in grade, a reduction in pay, or a furlough of 30 days or less. Suspensions of 14 days or fewer follow a separate, more limited process and generally cannot be appealed to the MSPB.
Whether an employee has appeal rights also depends on their status. Competitive service employees usually gain those rights after completing a one-year probationary or trial period. In the excepted service, preference eligible employees generally qualify after one year of current continuous service, while non-preference eligible employees generally need two years.
How long do you have to respond to a proposed removal?
Federal law requires the agency to give at least 30 days’ advance written notice before an adverse action takes effect, and the employee must be given a reasonable amount of time, at least 7 days, to answer orally and in writing. Many agencies allow more, but the deadline in the proposal letter controls, and extensions must be requested before it passes.
The reply is often the best chance to change the outcome. A deciding official can reduce the penalty or drop the charges entirely, and anything left unaddressed at this stage becomes harder to challenge later.
How long do you have to file an MSPB appeal?
An appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board generally must be filed within 30 days of the action’s effective date, or within 30 days of receiving the agency’s decision, whichever is later, under 5 C.F.R. § 1201.22. Employees in D.C. typically file with the MSPB’s Washington Regional Office. Late appeals are dismissed unless the employee shows good cause for the delay.
If discrimination is part of the claim, the case may be a “mixed case,” meaning it can proceed either through the agency’s EEO process or directly before the MSPB. Choosing one route can affect the other, so this decision deserves careful thought early on.
What does the agency have to prove?
In a Chapter 75 misconduct case, the agency must prove its charges by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning the charge is more likely true than not. It must also show a connection between the conduct and the efficiency of the service, and that the penalty is reasonable. Penalty reviews usually turn on the Douglas factors, a set of 12 considerations from the 1981 MSPB decision Douglas v. Veterans Administration, including the employee’s past record, length of service, and consistency with penalties given to others.
Performance-based removals under Chapter 43 follow different rules, including a lower “substantial evidence” standard and a required opportunity to improve.
Choosing the right representation
A notice of proposed removal starts a clock that does not pause for anyone. The most useful thing an employee can do is gather the proposal letter, the evidence file, recent performance appraisals, and any prior disciplinary records, then speak with an attorney before the reply deadline. Early advice shapes the reply, preserves appeal options, and gives the employee a clearer picture of what is realistically at stake. If you are facing an adverse action, reach out to counsel now rather than after the decision is issued.
*Attorney advertising. This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.*The four firms here form a new combination, and none of them appeared together in earlier listicles. The brief asks for the primary keyword in the conclusion but also says the closing shouldn’t name any businesses. I kept the closing generic, so “Mundaca Law” appears in the H1, the intro, and the linked H2. If you’d rather the closing name the firm, I can add it to the call to action.
Leave a Comment