Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Abril-Rivera v. Johnson, 806 F.3d 599 (2015)

Citation
Abril-Rivera v. Johnson, 806 F.3d 599 (2015)
Parent Document
Abril-Rivera v. Johnson, 806 F.3d 599 (2015)
Effective Date
2015-11-17

Other Sections in This Document (839)

Full Text

730 chars
The majority states that it agrees with the district court that the rotational staffing plan served FEMA’s needs by allowing it to have some employees in the PR Center, despite the building’s unsafe conditions, so that they could assist in a disaster scenario. This seems completely incon-gruent with FEMA’s claim that it had no operational need for the PR Center only a few months after the rotationál staffing plan began. It is nonsensical to say that the justification for closing the PR Center permanently was that FEMA did not need those employees because of reductions in operations while recognizing that FEMA had a legitimate need to maintain at least some of them in that same center to assist in the event of a disaster.