38 C.F.R. § 0.735-12

Standards of conduct in special areas

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Safety. (1) Employees will observe safety instructions, signs, and normal safety practices and precautions, including the use of protective clothing and equipment.

(2) An employee shall report each work-connected injury, accident or disease he or she suffers.

(b) Furnishing testimony. Employees will furnish information and testify freely and honestly in cases respecting employment and disciplinary matters. Refusal to testify, concealment of material facts, or willfully inaccurate testimony in connection with an investigation or hearing may be ground for disciplinary action. An employee, however, will not be required to give testimony against himself or herself in any matter in which there is indication that he or she may be or is involved in a violation of law wherein there is a possibility of self-incrimination.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1987–2013 · leading case: Sher v. U.S. Dep't of Vets. Affairs, 488 F.3d 489 (1st Cir. 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sher v. U.S. Dep't of Vets. Affairs, 488 F.3d 489 (1st Cir. 2007). · cites it 4× “§ 2635 , and failing to cooperate with an administrative investigation, in violation of 38 C.F.R. § 0.735-12 (b). After an initial reversal of the failure to cooperate charge by an Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”), the Merit Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”) issued a final order…”

United States v. Palmquist, 712 F.3d 640 (1st Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “Sher did not create a blanket rule that employees subject to 38 C.F.R. § 0.735-12 (b) are entitled to immunity under Garrity .”

Refine Constr. Co. v. United States, 12 Cl. Ct. 56 (Ct. Cl. 1987). “For example, for an employee of the VA to perform general engineering work for a contractor who has been selected for a VA contract, in the absence of written approval to perform those services, the *64 court can quite easily find a violation of the Standards of Ethical Conduct,…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.