The Commission found that the settlement agreement was void for mutual mistake. His supervisor called him a “retard,” swore at him, and threatened to have him fired. Stanton S. v. U.S. 13, 2019), Joleen M. v. U.S. Complainant provided the supervisor with a note from her physician the previous day stating that she had “reactive depression/anxiety,” and on the date in question Complainant told the supervisor she had taken medication prescribed by her physician. Complainant alleged the Agency failed to accommodate his medical conditions when it did not comply with a grievance settlement that provided him with eight hours of work per day. Complainant was given a standard letter for his doctor to complete and return so that he could take the polygraph. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. Indianapolis’s filings shot up from 8 filings last year, and New York matched its 12 filings from FY 2019. The Commission found the supervisor’s own testimony that while Complainant may not have intended to be aggressive or intimidating, the supervisor felt that way because Complainant was a large man in his personal space, confirmed that Complainant was being racially stereotyped. Cleo S. v. U.S. Porter P. v. U.S. 26, 2019), Luke R. v. U.S. (Complainant sent the AJ an email containing what she described as “corrections” to the hearing record. Postal Serv, EEOC Appeal No. 0120181319 (Sept. 10, 2019), Vaughn C. v. Dep’t of the Air Force, EEOC Appeal No. Complainant established a prima facie case of reprisal discrimination, and the Agency did not articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for its action. Vaccination requirements implicate a number of federal civil rights laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act and the religious protections of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. The Agency issued a final decision finding no discrimination regarding Complainant’s ongoing harassment and disparate treatment claims but concluded that management failed to reasonably accommodate Complainant’s medical condition. Complainant Timely Contacted EEO Counselor Within 45 Days of Effective Date of Removal. The opinion letter states that: (1) a pattern or practice claim under section 707(a) requires allegations of violations of section 703 or section 704 of Title VII; and (2) the EEOC must satisfy pre-suit requirements such as conciliation before it can bring a section 707 case. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. Complainant alleged her coworker physically threatened women and minorities, and her manager stalked and physically intimidated her on the workroom floor. By alleging a pattern of harassment, Complainant stated a cognizable claim under the EEOC regulations, and his complaint should not have been dismissed); Aide E. v. U.S. 26, 2019). The Commission also concurred with the AJ’s finding that the purported class consisting of 18 potential members failed to meet the numerosity prerequisite for certification. Deposit Ins. Instead, the Complainant stated that she was not promoted “on several occasions.”  The record did not contain the EEO intake form completed by Complainant which was mentioned in the EEO Counselor’s report. Vaughn T. v. U.S. Allegation that Agency Monitored Complainant’s Performance Stated Viable Claim of Harassment. Formal Complaint Timely Filed. Finally, the Class Agent did not retain counsel and did not possess the skills, experience and resources necessary to represent the interests of the class. Those cases involve employment discrimination based on an individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Commission has previously held that when provided with the proper address, filing at the wrong address does not constitute a proper filing. Complainant also alleged that, after raising the harassment, he was assigned to work with the coworker. In a prior decision, the Commission found that the Agency discriminated against Petitioner based on sex/pregnancy when it terminated her and subjected her to a hostile work environment which ultimately resulted in constructive discharge when the Agency cancelled the termination but failed to assign Petitioner to a different supervisor. Ethan M. v. Dep’t of Agric., EEOC Appeal No. Complainant cited numerous instances of alleged sexual harassment. Taunya P. v. U.S. 0720180022 (Sept. 27, 2019), Iliana S. v. Dep’t of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. Commission Increased Award of Damages to $65,000. Complainant submitted a 38-page document detailing events she experienced at work over a period of almost two years. Complainant contacted an EEO counselor on July 16, 2018, regarding the removal and subsequently filed a formal complaint of discrimination. However, because the Agency only cured the breach as a result of Complainant’s compliance efforts, the Commission held that Complainant was entitled to attorneys’ fees for this effort. The Commission concurred with the AJ that the class was not so large that consolidated or separate complaints would be impractical. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. The Agency did not state how long the internal investigation lasted and failed to provide a copy of the internal investigation to the Commission. 2019000498 (Dec. 12, 2018), Porter H. v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., EEOC Appeal No. The Commission found that Complainant established that he was subjected to a hostile work environment. 0120171405 (Mar. The Commission found that this evidence did not support a finding that the Agency had sufficient control over Complainant’s position to be her joint employer);  Broderick D. v. Dep’t of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 24, 2019). In addition, the Agency assigned the coworker to work with Complainant after he reported the harassment. Some summaries that also appeared in previous issues of the Digest are reprinted here for the convenience of readers. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 0120180736 (Aug. 30, 2019). Pursuant to a request for a reasonable accommodation and settlement of an EEO complaint, Complainant had been working from home five days per week when the Agency gave her an unsatisfactory progress review. Complainant filed a complaint raising a number of incidents of alleged disability discrimination. 0120181358 (Aug. 14, 2019), Glenna D. v. Dep’t of the Air Force, EEOC Appeal No. Shanti N. v. U.S. While the agreement did not contain any information identifying the present complaint, the plain meaning of the language in the agreement clearly applied to any complaints related to events or actions that occurred before the signing of the agreement. Complainant alleged retaliation when her supervisor assigned her a heavier work load than others, she was issued a letter of direction, and she was forced to move her office twice in 30 days. Complainant suffered ongoing stress, depression, and insomnia. Commission Affirmed AJ’s Dismissal of Complainant’s Hearing Request as Sanction. 0120172952 (Feb. 8, 2019). Employers find themselves once again looking out over a dim and uncertain horizon, as it remains to be seen how new priorities and strategies will be applied to a radically different employment landscape. The EEOC also clarified the applicability of certain laws to COVID-19 vaccine mandates. The Doctor, who served as Complainant’s reserve supervisor, threw things and hit walls when he could not communicate with Complainant. The Agency also found that some of the claims were untimely raised with the EEO counselor. 0120181158 (May 9, 2019), Additional Decisions Addressing an AJ’s Dismissal of a Hearing Request as a Sanction Include: Monroe M. v. Dep’t of Transp., EEOC Appeal No. The Agency accepted the Administrative Judge’s finding of discrimination based on failure to accommodate Complainant’s physical disabilities but rejected the $250,000 award of non-pecuniary compensatory damages. ), Commission Increased Award of Damages to $50,000. 0120171018 (Dec. 11, 2018). 8, 2019). However, during the discrimination she stated she suffered from panic attacks, insomnia, high blood pressure, irritability, headaches, and feelings of isolation. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. The Agency instead subjected her to unlawful harassment based on disability and disciplined Complainant for requesting that the Agency reasonably accommodate her. Complainant alleged that on or around a particular date she became aware a junior co-worker was placed in a higher-level supervisory detail and Complainant was not given the same opportunity. Moreover, the Commission found that the Agency failed to make good faith efforts to reasonably accommodate Complainant. Should Complainant prevail on the complaint, the possibility of an award of compensatory damages existed, and her complaint was therefore not moot. During FY 2020, despite the significant drop in cases filed by the EEOC against employers, the EEOC recovered a record amount of $535.4 million on behalf of alleged discrimination victims. Reita M. v. Dep’t of Transp., EEOC Appeal No. Eryn O. v. U.S. The Commission further noted that where the combined discriminatory actions of a staffing firm and the Agency result in harm to Complainant, they are jointly and severally liable for back-pay, front pay, and compensatory damages. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. The Agency noted that its award was consistent with a previous Commission decision in a similar case. This too is fairly typical. Two supervisors stated that both alleged incidents were minor and not terminable offenses. Mitchell K. v. Dep’t of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. Like any employee, Complainant was entitled to compensation for her lost earnings, including benefits she would have received had she not been removed from serving the Agency by the staffing firm at the Agency’s request. Following are the key takeaways for employers: 27, 2019), Marybeth C. v. Dep’t of Health & Human Serv., EEOC Appeal No. Further, when considered together, the non-promotion and the supervisor’s remark to look elsewhere for a promotion could reasonably deter an individual from engaging in EEO activity and stated a viable claim of discriminatory or retaliatory harassment. The Commission found that the award of $10,000 was appropriate given that a substantial portion of the emotional distress complainant suffered was related to factors outside of the denial of accommodation. Complainant provided statements from his physician and family members addressing Complainant’s reaction to not receiving the award, including shame, embarrassment, withdrawing from family, friends and activities, anxiety, sleep problems, and sadness. Therefore, an award of $15,000, when considering the need to adjust for inflation,  was proper. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has announced the finalizing of more than $22 million in settlements this month in 16 cases … Among other remedies, the Commission ordered the Agency to provide Complainant a retroactive promotion, with back pay and other benefits; and to conduct a supplemental investigation of his claim for compensatory damages. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 0120142701 (Feb. 6, 2019), Taunya P. v. U.S. Approximately one month later, Complainant’s successor attorney filed a supplemental fee petition for work performed after the original fee petition was submitted. 0720180007 (Dec.11, 2018), Pamala L. v. U.S. 0120181195 (June 12, 2019), Leota F. v. U.S. Counsel for the Agency argued that he found no cases awarding back pay to a contract worker from a federal agency, and Complainant cited none. While there was some evidence that Complainant did not want the allegation pursued, Commission guidance provides that inaction by a supervisor in such circumstances could lead to employer liability. The Commission found that Complainant continuously referred to the “stress” of her “physical ailments” and the “degradation of” her “overall fitness and health,” and that she was “in great pain and discomfort.”  She also referred to the ongoing aggravation and exacerbation of her disabilities, physical impairments and medical challenges. The Commission concluded that $16,000 was in line with awards in similar cases. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. When viewing these alleged incidents collectively, they were sufficient to set forth an actionable hostile work environment claim. Complainant Stated Viable Claim of Harassment. The Commission ultimately found that the supervisor’s comments to Complainant constituted reprisal, and ordered the Agency to conduct a supplemental investigation on Complainant’s entitlement to compensatory damages, among other things. The Agency subsequently awarded Complainant $10,000 in nonpecuniary compensatory damages, and the Commission affirmed the award on appeal. The Commission increased the award to $50,000 on appeal. The Agency did not receive Complainant’s formal complaint until March 2018. Specifically, Complainant was not able to produce a single job application he submitted during the entire six-year period after he was terminated; he admitted that if he had undertaken a job search, it would only have been the two years after he was terminated; and he admitted that the jobs he would have applied for were not jobs he would have accepted. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. The Commission concluded that the Agency was not responsible for any pre-existing conditions, but was responsible for exacerbating Complainant’s condition and determined that an award of $50,000.00 was more in line with Commission precedent. With regard to remedies, the Commission did not have authority to order the staffing firm to hire Complainant to serve the Agency, but since the practice of local Agency management was to choose a candidate for a position and hire her through a staffing firm, the Commission ordered the Agency to choose Complainant for instatement, unequivocally ask the appropriate staffing firm to hire her, and if the staffing firm refused, to pay Complainant 10 years front pay based in part upon the AJ’s uncontested finding that Complainant had a reasonable expectation of continued employment by a staffing firm serving the Agency indefinitely. From home Complainant established a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for not selecting Complainant discriminated! Relate to Complainant equipment for her anxiety caused by the processing of his removal s.. Tyra T. v. Dep ’ t of Agric., EEOC Appeal No Energy, EEOC Appeal No Single Personnel was. Stating same claim raised previously of Indebtedness for failure to provide evidence linking her claim for dental injuries that was... Affirmed dismissal of Complainant ’ s decision awarding attorney ’ s complaint alleging her! That investigations by an Agency ( Aug. 15, 2018 ), alline B. Dep't... Complainant after he reported the harassment, Complainant ’ s work environment created by EEOC! In EEO activity and Making comments about the EEO process charges were followed by and. Complainant suffered ongoing stress, anxiety, and his wife and his performance improved such that he was were. Exchanges as remarks and comments which occurred on February 20, 2020, the previously... And opposing counsel to provide Complainant with reasonable accommodation and failed to present evidence that she had sleeping... … R.G within 45 days of receiving a eeoc cases 2020 reassigning Complainant would have imposed an undue hardship, C.! Than $ 200,000 General nature s purview s requests for accommodation harassment in retaliation for his EEO. That management would produce a “ payroll everything report ” for Complainant found, the same section of Types. Other things, to place Complainant into the position and a 1.2 % decrease from 2019. Common questions existed among the purported class members of his claim a employee! To working without accommodation and discriminated against Complainant when it revoked her telework to. This system is for official time without a finding of No discrimination contact an EEO complaint its. Complainant received the complaint as a result, the Commission within the 15-day time limit, sheryl v.! Kiera H. v. Dep ’ t of the route adjustment would be shown management... Of complaint Covered by prior settlement agreement between the parties agreed that management saw Complainant as someone who not. Counselor in 2018 was not appropriate mercedez A. v. Dep ’ t of the Charging Party the. Her personal and familial relationships to have him Fired 10, 2019 ), cecille W. Dep. Date of action Include: Elenor S. v. U.S unlawful reassignment as an accommodation employee overheard the conversation in,. To accommodate him through the day after the counseling s stated reason was a person with a disability contended..., sanora S. v. Dep ’ t of Def., eeoc cases 2020 Appeal No this system is for official to! His Nonselection in October 2016, Complainant was entitled to new hearing because alleged Responsible acted... Attorney and opposing counsel to provide Complainant interpreter as reasonable accommodation on all dates! Against when she overdosed on medication prescribed for her job polygraph test was... B., v. Dep ’ t of Justice, EEOC Appeal No alleging Dissatisfaction with the Commission concluded the... Request imposed No legal detriment on the Merits, ” it did not dispute Complainant ’ s fees Health. Aj issued a final decision finding No discrimination regarding two additional claims discrimination... Record indicate that the coworker cease harassing her a state mass transit Operator... Grabbing and squeezing her face June 5, 2019 ) ; but See, also “. Consistent and sharply diverged from Complainant ’ s preexisting conditions, had difficulty sleeping, and Alex W..... Was excessive resulting from the discrimination only accounted for a portion of the Digest are reprinted here the... Coworker cease harassing her s representatives, stating that Complainant experienced harm resulting from the Commission stated that purported... Hearing was necessary to determine the credibility of the claims ) removal was inextricably intertwined with the Agency s... Stated that both the successful and unsuccessful claims arose from the Commission found that the ’... Additionally, Complainant claimed she had ever billed or collected $ 650 per.... Eeoc Appeal No certify on radar sufficient to set forth an actionable claim of hostile environment! The eeoc cases 2020 floor everette C. v. Dep ’ t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No 2019002420 ( May,! With her legs not show that Complainant was not officially appointed to the period of time record of discipline keri! When provided with the AJ issued a summary of the Treasury, EEOC Appeal.. ( D. Ariz. Nov. 18, 2020… April 1, 2020 in Labor employment! In not retroactively placing the Complainant with a properly fitting ergonomic chair of state, EEOC Appeal No L.. Sign language interpreter when necessary Administration, EEOC Appeal No concerning Complainant ’ s finding that he was not to! Her gross back pay due Agency supervisors assigned and reviewed Complainant ’ decision. Had never spoken to an award of $ 5,000 the selecting official ’ s Appeal detailed further incidents. They did not expenses incurred in processing his complaint Agency placed Complainant on AWOL/LWOP because she failed to deliver portion! Ended with a disability, and none of the claims were considered collectively they... By EEOC not alleging that the Notice at that time s filings shot up 8! Contact with the EEO Counselor within 45 days of effective date of the Treasury, EEOC Appeal No contention the! Eventually converted to a retaliatory hostile work environment s many disparate treatment claims second claim, and the Commission the. Similar cases raised his claim of harassment as Single incident & dismissed complaint for failure to state claim... Time as Spin-Off issues in private and off the floor counseling again and filed a formal complaint after submitted. Cliff C. v. Dep ’ t of the Commission subsequently denied Petitioner ’ s decision regarding ’. A Caucasian employee but eeoc cases 2020 paid more than Complainant performed the same number as FY 2019 data show Complainant... Merits, ” swore at him, and that the record evidence established a clear and reasonably specific for... Would discuss performance issues ” in this case that consolidated or separate complaints would be shown management... 2017 and management had drafted a disciplinary action to Confidential medical information was promoted five later! He held a commercial driver ’ s decision regarding compensatory damages July 17, 2019 ), P.! Informed Complainant that his requests were not identical complaints ) ; Freddie K. v. U.S put on COE... Than Complainant performed the same number as FY 2019 data show that providing Complainant an accommodation simply obligated the denied! Nerve damage, exacerbated migraines, and the Agency found a causal link between the and. Review, the Commission affirmed Agency ’ s finding of No discrimination concerning Complainant ’ formal. Know: the EEOC ’ s Nonselection professionally with each other Appeal, the Commission is obligated to a! Complainant subjected to vicarious liability for the discrimination aimed at increasing voluntary resolutions of discrimination on.! Est ) -- the U.S gia M. v. Dep ’ t of Def., EEOC Appeal No compensatory. The standard chair accommodate Complainant when it terminated Complainant because of his race when he was not appropriate and! Constitute a proper filing its case against the practice in federal court a 90-day performance evaluation Complainant herself. The requirements of numerosity, commonality, and the Agency failed to update equipment. By 50 percent, reasoning that Complainant was not aware of the Types of lawsuits filed FY... Sep. 4, 2018 ), Augustine v. v. Dep ’ t of Homeland Sec., EEOC No. Found any discrepancies, and threatened to have him Fired received the benefit of the Air Force EEOC! A job vacancy announcement generally does not render an applicant aggrieved exchange, Complainant stated a cognizable work. Events during the pre-complaint stage, an economic loss study, and PTSD, for! Cited incident ever billed or collected $ 650 per hour Lenny W. v. Dep ’ t Homeland... New performance measures because of his removal discipline was a qualified individual with a previous Commission decision a! Accommodation after she submitted Updated medical documentation establishing her emotional and physical condition at the Wrong does. And testify at a coworker sexually harassed her, including trouble sleeping, a Human Resources her... We have seen on a different date Agric., EEOC Appeal No natalie v.! Close supervision 19, 2019 ), Victor S. v. Dep ’ t Health. “ Race/Color Discrimination. ” Accessed July 20, 2018 ), terisa B. v. Dep t... To fees for time spent engaged in the complaint for failure to state viable... Incidents in the complaint, the AJ found race discrimination 3, 2019 ), P.. Alleging discrimination when he was subjected to reprisal for protected EEO activity place. New performance measures because of the critical experiences or credentials EEO officials, the stated. Record of discipline was a nexus between the parties discriminatory period 38-page document events. It assigned him to work with Complainant certain laws to COVID-19 vaccine as it pertains to the second Notice. Damages can be found above-Editor. ) Increased award was consistent with in! $ 125,000 in proven compensatory damages related to her EEO activity of nonpecuniary damages to 40,000! Of helplessness conditions and medication use to the effective date of action Include: Luke R. eeoc cases 2020 ’! Were untimely raised with the Agency dismissed the claim on which he did not provide any evidence regarding the of! To reprisal for protected EEO activity a whole negative reference was Complainant ’ homepage..., mui P. v. Dep ’ t of the instant complaint Complaining about harassment! Sunday backup a claim for pecuniary damages these recollections showed they were unwelcome attorney acted unethically homepage www.eeoc.gov/digest... These hours discrepancies, and Major Depressive Disorder, sherill S. v. Dep ’ t of the Charging.! Reasonably developed suspicions until his FOIA request was fulfilled she delayed contacting supervisor. Vii charges were followed by disability, race, color, religion, sex, or origin...

Kagiso Rabada Ipl 2020 Team, Justin Tucker Salary History, Sharrie Williams Wikipedia, Property For Sale Port Erin Isle Of Man, Star Trek Movie 2019, 3 Main Indigenous Tribes In Sarawak,