Copyright 2023 The Angel Law Firm, PLLC. Based on Title VII charges alone, the EEOC collected $234,000,000 in monetary benefits in 2020. 2019005957 (Apr. 0720180018 (Aug. 15, 2018), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0720180018.txt. 2020001428 (Aug. 13, 2020), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2020_12_07/2020001428.pdf. Generally, to win a retaliation case, you have to show (1) legally protected activity -- of which Ryan had tons, (2) adverse employment action -- and getting fired is clearly "adverse," so Ryan had that, too, and (3) a "causal connection" between the legally protected activity and the adverse employment action (uh-oh). The USPS is an independent agency of the federal government that receives no tax dollars, and is the second-largest employer in the US behind Walmart. Iliana S. v. U.S. endstream
endobj
512 0 obj
<. The more inherently degrading or humiliating the defendants action is, the more reasonable to infer that a person would suffer humiliation or distress from that action. v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, EEOC Case No. No. Record was insufficient to determine whether Agency jointly employed Complainant where record did not contain the contract between the Agency and staffing firm, Complainant's position description, or any evidence regarding the day-to-day actions, duties, and responsibilities of Complainant's job. Complainant was entitled to an award of $25,000.00 in nonpecuniary compensatory damages where he demonstrated that, because of the Agency's conduct, he endured emotional distress which affected not only him but his family relationships and that, due to his inability to gain employment, his depression worsened and he was unable to afford healthcare for treatment. info@eeoc.gov
) or https:// means youve safely connected to the .gov website. The Administrative Judge properly reduced Complainant's attorney's fees and costs by 40 percent where Complainant prevailed on only one of his five retaliation claims, the successful claim was not so inextricably intertwined with the unsuccessful claims that Complainant would be entitled to an award of full attorney's fees, the case did not present novel issues, and the fee petition contained numerous instances that might be considered excessive, duplicative, or unreasonable time expended. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuitthat Eclipse Advantage, Inc., violated federal law by subjecting an African-American employee to racial discrimination and retaliation at its Aldi Food Service warehouse in Hinckley, Ohio. Allegations of retaliation by IRS Examiner and Taxpayer Advocate properly dismissed for failure to state a claim where actions at issue occurred to Complainant as a taxpayer, not as a former employee, and allegations constituted a collateral attack on the tax adjudication process. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0520130618 (June 9, 2017) citing thEEOC V. AIC Security Investigations, Inc. 55 F.3d 1276 at 1286 (7 Cir. Lamar M. v. U.S. The Agency discriminated against Complainant based on sex when, shortly after she informed her supervisor of her pregnancy, he began to scrutinize her activities while she teleworked and to make cumbersome requests. Agency discriminated against Complainant on the basis of disability when his managers did not allow him to take a polygraph examination, which was required for his position, where there was no reason to believe that his multiple sclerosis and medication would affect the validity of the polygraph result. In reversing the agencys final decision, the EEOC held that evidence from a health-care provider or other expert is not a mandatory prerequisite for recovery of compensatory damages for emotional harm. It went to state that: Objective evidence of compensatory damages can include statements from the Complainant concerning his emotional pain or suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, injury to professional standing, injury to character or reputation, injury to credit standing, loss of health and any other non-pecuniary losses that are incurred as a result of the discriminatory conduct. 0120181844 (Sept. 10, 2019), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120181844.pdf. Mr. Angel has represented federal employees, including USPS employees for nearly 15 years. The complainant worked at the United States Postal Service (USPS). Complainant not entitled to award of Thrift Savings Plan reimbursements where there was no evidence that she participated in the program. 2019004084 (Sept. 15, 2020), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2020_12_07/2019004084.pdf. USPS employee wins discrimination and harassment claim with the EEOC. Substantial evidence supported Administrative Judge's determination that the Agency discriminated against Complainant on the basis of race when it terminated his employment as a sales store checker during his probationary period; the AJ found Complainant to be credible, the Agency's stated reason (that Complainant had an altercation with a bagger) was not believable, the evidence showed that those terminated during their probationary period were predominantly African-Americans, and a Caucasian employee who also had an altercation with the bagger did not receive any disciplinary action. 2020003134 (Oct. 15, 2020), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2021_01_19/2020003134.pdf. 24, 2017), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120132211.txt. The four unions which officially represent the postal workersthe American Postal Workers Union, National Association of Letter Carriers, National Postal Mail Handlers Union and National Rural Letter Carriers Associationhave not lifted a finger to mobilize workers to oppose these attacks, including the loss of over 250,000 post office jobs since 1999an almost 28 percent reduction in its workforce. Complainant established that she was subjected to a hostile work environment because of her sex where a coworker made several offensive comments to her about her sexual orientation, including "you need a man in your life" and "I do not think same sex couples should be allowed to get married"; Complainant asserted that the comments occurred on a weekly basis, and other coworkers corroborated that the comments occurred. However, the judge may still award as much or less as the end result. death spawn osrs. On December 8, 2017, Arbitrator Shyam Das found that the Postal Service was in violation of the parties Article 1.6.B Global Settlement Remedy (This article first appeared in the July/August 2021 issue of the American Postal Worker magazine)
Find your nearest EEOC office
No violation of Equal Pay Act where Agency established that the Agency-wide salary increases and the performance-based salary increase system were gender-neutral factors, were applied consistently, and explain any compensation disparity between Complainant and her male coworkers. Pamula W. v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. Where Agency failed to provide evidence of its compliance with Commission's orders, and its refusal to report on its compliance appeared to be part of an ongoing pattern of similar failures, Agency was ordered to provide an analysis of its Fiscal Year 2018-2019 reporting on compliance with EEOC orders and a detailed action plan setting forth how the problems identified in its analysis will be corrected. Agency's final order adopting Administrative Judge's decision vacated, and case remanded to Agency for reissuance of final order, where Complainant did not receive the AJ's decision and therefore was unable to argue with specificity about the AJ's findings and conclusions that the Agency implemented. Complainant subjected to a hostile work environment based on sex where subordinate disparaged him because of his sexual orientation and managers, who placed the onus on Complainant to discipline the harasser or file an EEO complaint, failed to take prompt and effective action; because Agency did not have an effective anti-harassment policy, Agency was ordered to seek technical assistance from EEOC's Office of Federal Operations and to correct the policy's deficiencies. 48-1 40-0062-06, the final agency decision (FAD) issued in connection USPS' average processing time for all complaint closures increased from 238 days in FY 2008 to 243 days in FY 2009. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. Kirk J. Angel is an employment attorney representing federal employees. The majority of cases, about 67 percent, are ruled in the plaintiff's favor when taken to litigation. The Commission had previously found discrimination in EEOC Appeal No. Agency subjected Complainant to a retaliatory hostile work environment when, during a conversation in which Complainant asked her supervisor to investigate her allegations of race discrimination, the supervisor reminded Complainant that she was still in a probationary status, denied that the Agency was discriminating, told Complainant "to calm down on that," and stated that Complainant's co-workers might file complaints against her because they found her claims of race discrimination offensive. 0120180568 (Apr. 15, 2016), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120123215.txt. Complainant established a prima facie case of age discrimination, and Agency did not meet its burden of production to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for not selecting Complainant for a supervisory position; stating that a complainant was not selected because she received a lower score than the selectees does not meet an agencys burden of production, unless the agency explains the specific reasoning for the score. In the case of SandraMcConnell, et al. (This article first appeared in the January/February 2021 issue of the American Postal Worker magazine) On December 1, 2020, Arbitrator Sharnoff issued a decision confirming Clerk Craft jurisdiction over operation of the Small Parcel Sorting System. Former USPS workers in the NRP class action suit allege that they were discriminated against after showing proof that they had been injured at work. January 17, 2020 - Status Update - Pittman Settlement Letters. For Deaf/Hard of Hearing callers:
USPS agreed to pay $840,044 for 4,584 pre-complaint settlements, of which 433 were monetary settlements averaging $1,940. Postal Service who was subjected to a hostile work environment for over three years and then removed. Agency denied Complainant a reasonable accommodation in violation of the Rehabilitation Act when it failed to provide him with a sign-language interpreter at the kick-off Combined Federal Campaign meeting intended for all facility employees; a "make-up" meeting, where only the CFC representative and three deaf employees, but no keynote speakers, were present was insufficient to remedy the situation. An Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) administrative judge may suspend a hearing to allow the parties to settle a case and will accept a settlement to resolve the case at any time before a final decision is reached. Although Complainant prevailed on only two of his thirteen claims, his hostile work environment claim was not fractionable from his successful claims because they arose out of a common core of facts which took place during his approximately nine months of employment. In 2021, we reported that non-career employees' turnover and injury rates were higher than career rates, both before and after we controlled for numerous factors such as employee tenure. To help the public identify those decisions, the Commission has decided to assign randomly generated first names and initials, along with a brief summary of the decisions, to the cases. by Kirk Angel | Mar 16, 2021 | EEOC, Employment Law, General | 0 comments. Agency discriminated against Complainant on the basis of national origin when her supervisor prohibited her from interacting with a contractor on the ground that she had a language barrier with the contractor; Agency did not identify any specific communications that the contractor could not understand or any specific problems with Complainant's language skills, and there was no evidence that anyone could not understand Complainant. Eura B. v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, EEOC Appeal No. Administrative Judge properly ordered Agency to stop issuing cease-and-desist letters to employees who have reported discrimination, absent clear, documented evidence of some conduct (other than reporting discrimination) that the Agency reasonably concludes would warrant discipline in the absence of the employee's protected activity; issuing Complainant a cease-and-desist letter gave the appearance that Complainant, who complained of ongoing racial and sexual harassment, was just as culpable as her harasser. For Deaf/Hard of Hearing callers:
Complainant entitled to attorney's fees where relief awarded was based on per se reprisal claims that the Administrative Judge sua sponte raised mid-way through the hearing process; attorney's competent representation of Complainant and development of the evidence led directly to the AJ's sua sponte raising of reprisal as a basis. Stating that a complainant was not selected for a supervisory position because she received a lower score than the selectees does not meet an agencys burden of production, unless the agency explains the specific reasoning for the scores; the assertion that a complainant ranked lower than the selectees is meaningless without evidence of the specific scores, the manner in which the scores were derived, and the pertinence of the scores to the position at issue. According to the decision, Phase 2 consisted largely of canvassing facilities to identify work necessary for operations and functions, attempting to match the employee with the necessary work, and if none is found, notifying the employee that no work was available. Secure .gov websites use HTTPS Plains and Copperhead Pipeline Companies Reach Settlement with EEOC for $1.75 Million U.S. Share sensitive 0120131989 (Oct. 26, 2016), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120131989.txt. USPS timely processed 99.5% of the 17,054 pre-complaint counselings (without remands) completed in FY 2009. The Commission lacks jurisdiction to consider appeals from Peace Corps volunteers and applicants, who have a separate EEO complaint process outside Commission jurisdiction; although Complainant filed her complaint against the State Department, it concerned a Peace Corps volunteer position over which the Commission did not have jurisdiction. Darin B. v. Office of Personnel Management, EEOC Appeal No. Stefan C. v. Dep't of Homeland Security, EEOC Appeal No. EEOC regulations specify the procedures to follow if either party comes to believe the settlement agreement has been breached. 4~I1i.#3S*S6SS2+V18gtdm$0^FA !HS4$0I@T1 6
Harriet M. v. Dep't of Defense, EEOC Appeal No. When determining an award of non-pecuniary compensatory damages, the Commission may consider the present-day value of comparable awards. Bart M. v. Dep't of the Interior, EEOC Appeal No. michael sandel justice course syllabus. All workers here quit, retired, or were fired. An average out of court settlement is about $40,000. Eleni M. v. Dep't of Transportation, EEOC Appeal No. That number includes both private sector and state and local . Mindy O. v. Dep't of Homeland Security, EEOC Appeal No. The USPS has fought back against the claims brought forward by the lawsuit, contesting each workers claim individually, alleging that injured workers never provided enough proof that they had disabilities or were actually harmed as a result of the NRP. Zonia C. v. Dep't of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. Complainant did nothing more than raise broad, across-the-board allegations of discriminatory policies and practices covering a variety of personnel processes, she was unable to establish that each allegation happened to every class member, and counsels actions raised concerns that the classs interests would not be protected.