No Breach Found. The record showed that Complainant filed his complaint within 15 days of his attorney’s receipt of the Notice, and his complaint was therefore timely. While Complainant indicated that she was told of her termination in January 2019, Complainant’s most recent personnel form showed that her last day in pay status was November 30, 2009, and correspondence relating to her OWCP claim indicated that her wage compensation benefits were  terminated by the Department of Labor in August 2015. 0120182008 (Dec. 13, 2019). The data presented in this project are from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Enforcement & Litigation Statistics. 8, 2019), Bettyann B. v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. The Commission noted that the Agency did not identify which if any higher-level duties that Complainant was not performing. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. In Hana D v. U.S. Other key cases in 2019 covered: dismissal for disability discrimination; collective bargaining; covert CCTV in the workplace; age discrimination in pensions; and holiday pay. Therefore, the Commission found that the Agency failed to support its dismissal decision and that Complainant’s initial pursuit of the administrative grievance process concerning his performance appraisal was not a bar to his EEO complaint. 2019002255 (May 9, 2019), Christopher H. v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. While the record showed that Complainant filed 20 complaints over 14 years, the Commission has stated that filing numerous complaints alone is not a sufficient basis for finding abuse of process, and the number of complaints filed by Complainant was not extraordinary. [15] Id citing Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 22 (1993). The most recent year of the data is 2018. 2019005726 (Nov. 6, 2019). TJ Simers thought his claim was worth more and in August 2019, he was proved right. Some cases do not get timely registered with the EEOC or may be encoded differently at the state and federal level, for example. The Commission found that the Agency failed to support its decision dismissing Complainant’s complaint on grounds that it stated the same claim as that raised in a prior complaint. Agency Failed to Show that Complainant Was Aware of Limitation Period. As a bipartisan federal agency, it is customary for the President to nominate Commissioners who are members of both parties. 2019000418 (Oct. 8, 2019), Bret E. v. Dep’t of Transp., EEOC Appeal No. The Commission vacated the AJ’s decision on summary judgment finding no discrimination. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at Chap. On appeal, the Commission modified the award, finding that $75,000 was a more appropriate remedy. Marvin D. v. U.S. Admin., EEOC Request No. Pursuant to the Commission’s regulations, when the last day of the applicable limitation period for filing a complaint falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or federal holiday, the period shall be extended to include the next business day. A federal worker filing a complaint with the EEOC last year waited, on average, 543 days for resolution. Viewing the incidents collectively, the Commission found that Complainant set forth an actionable claim of harassment. While the formal complaint form indicated that the alleged discriminatory event occurred in a specific month and year, the EEO Counselor’s Report indicated that Complainant raised two additional alleged incidents of harassment. 2019003604 (Oct. 30, 2019) (the contractor decided where to assign Complainant, and Complainant alleged that a contract supervisor created a hostile work environment. Summary Judgment Reversed. A federal worker filing a complaint with the EEOC last year waited, on average, 543 days for resolution. Race Discrimination Settlement : Eclipse Advantage Lawsuit Eclipse Advantage Sued by EEOC for Racially Hostile Work Environment and Retaliation. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 2019005308 (Oct. 2, 2019), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, Equal Employment Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. [4] See Equal Employment Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. TJ Simers v The Los Angeles Times. Commission Modified Award of Attorney’s Fees. [29] Krysten M. v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. As always, we will keep abreast of EEOC data amid the ever-changing political milieu, and share lessons learned from FY 2019 to carry employers through the new year. Agency, EEOC Appeal No. Supreme Court opinions are browsable by year and U.S. Reports volume number, and are searchable by party name, case title, citation, full text and docket number. The Agency also reported that the lanyard with the CAC contained a key fob, which gives the possessor access to the numerous buildings and the server room. § 2000ff, et seq (genetic information). Furthermore, the Commission found that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that it would have been an undue hardship to grant Complainant’s religious accommodation request. For example, Complainant’s statement that he had been dealing with stress for three years showed that part of his stated harm occurred prior to the discriminatory events. While the Agency provided evidence that the Notice of Right to File was delivered to Complainant’s address of record on January 7, 2019, Complainant stated that he never received the Notice and the signature on the delivery receipt appeared different from Complainant’s signature on other documents of record. The Commission concluded that the record must be further developed through additional discovery and a hearing to determine exactly what the Agency's policies and practices were for using salary history in determining the starting salaries of external hires, and the impact those policies and practices had on female and African-American employees. By alleging a pattern of disability-based harassment, Complainant sufficiently asserted a viable claim of hostile work environment that required further investigation. Complainant alleged her supervisor accused her of not following proper protocol regarding facsimiles, and, when she tried to explain, the supervisor interrupted her and said she did not want to hear any more about it. 216, said the agency’s decision to send more cases to the “killing fields” — closing them without investigation — is a problematic solution to budget and resources woes. Complaint Improperly Dismissed. Howard G. v. Dep’t of Transp., EEOC Appeal No. The comprehensive enforcement and litigation statistics for FY 2019, which ended Sept. 30, 2019, are posted on the agency's website , which also includes detailed breakdown of charges by … This number represents 10.3% of all charges the agency received between October 2018 and September 2019. Complainant reported the incident to her manager who investigated the matter and moved Complainant to another location where Complainant would not have to interact with contract drivers or the public. [6], In addition, one of the reasons the distinction between claims and supporting evidence is important is because, to pursue a complaint of discrimination, a federal sector complainant must initiate the EEO process by first raising his/her allegations with an EEO Counselor within the timeframe specified in the Commission’s regulations. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. An agency must accept and process a complaint from any aggrieved employee or applicant alleging the agency discriminated against them. The Agency stated only that it had assessed 726 candidates, that 272 passed the assessment, and that the candidates who passed as well as those who did not pass the assessment “ranged from all ages, races, and gender[s].”  Based on the Agency’s statement regarding the candidate pool, the Commission found that Complainant established prima facie cases of discrimination based on race/national origin and age. 24, 2019). Complainant sought EEO counseling regarding the Agency’s denial of a job offer, but elected to file a mixed case appeal with the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). Disability Discrimination Found. Hayden R. v. U.S. [21] Reita M. v. Dep’t of Transp., EEOC Appeal No. 2019005240 (Oct. 31, 2019), Orson R. v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. The Commission’s jurisdiction is limited to employment discrimination, and Complainant failed to show a harm or loss with respect to federal employment. The EEOC has quite a backlog of cases (see Berrien’s comment above re: 100,000 charges each year). Employers are anxiously looking for any sign as to how this slate of leadership will put its stamp on the agency’s mission and, more importantly, which employers and business practices the agency will most heavily target. Complaint Improperly Dismissed as Untimely and for Failure to State a Claim. Specifically, the regulations require that complaints of discrimination be brought to the attention of the EEO Counselor within 45 days of the date of the alleged discrimination or the effective date of a personnel action. 5, § III (Aug. 5, 2015). 2020000050 (Dec. 10, 2019). Complainant initiated EEO contact on March 1, 2019, and subsequently filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against her when it terminated her from employment. The Agency dismissed the Complaint as untimely, and the Commission reversed the decision on appeal. The Commission, in Rosendo F. v. U.S. Wayne C. v. Dep't of Transp. Complainant contended that she was disparately treated when the Agency reported her security breaches to her staffing firm, and alleged that the Agency discriminated against her when she was terminated shortly after the Agency reported the security breaches. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is a Federal agency in the United States which enforces employment laws. Prot. The Commission concluded that by alleging a pattern of harassment, Complainant had stated a cognizable claim under the EEOC regulations. The Digest of EEO Law is a quarterly publication of EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations (OFO). Race: 23,976 (33.0%) 4. The Commission determined that the modified award was more consistent with Commission precedent. Natacha M. v. Dep’t of Health & Human Serv., EEOC Appeal No. The Commission found that contrary to the manner in which the Agency identified the formal complaint in the final decision, the instant formal complaint and EEO Counselor’s report reflected a more detailed series of alleged incidents. Mark D. v. Dep’t of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. In the underlying decision, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s award of $100,000 in non-pecuniary compensatory damages. The record lacked any documentation indicating the actual staffing or scheduling needs of the Amazon Sunday program. The Commission concluded that sanctions were not warranted under the circumstances of the case and vacated those provisions in the appellate Order. On appeal, the Commission noted that, in her informal and formal complaints, Complainant detailed numerous incidents of alleged harassment beginning in 2014, several of which occurred within the 45-day limitation period. The AJ found that Complainant did not connect his disability with the actions of his supervisor, and that similarly-situated employees were not treated differently than he was, as no one was given a reasonable accommodation for shift work at the time. Therefore, the Commission found that a 20% across-the-board reduction in fees was also warranted. Wade K. v. Dep’t of Health & Human Serv., EEOC Appeal No. By alleging a pattern of harassment, Complainant stated a cognizable claim under the EEOC Regulations and the Agency improperly dismissed her complaint. Judie D. v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm’n., EEOC Appeal No. In this case, the last day of the 15-day limitation period fell on a Saturday, and, as such, Complainant’s complaint was due on Monday, March 12. The EEOC reports a total of 11,283 sexual harassment charges in FY 2019, combining cases filed with the EEOC directly and those reported from FEPAs. In Krysten M. v. Department of Veterans Affairs, [29] the Agency, rather than addressing Complainant’s harassment claim, construed the claim as “consisting of one comment and other job-related management conduct,” including one event pertaining to her former supervisor, who had Complainant removed from a training class and accused Complainant of being the reason that a “customer/veteran” had complained about the facility. EEOC Compliance Manual, No. [5]  When an agency identifies each piece of factual evidence as a separate and distinct claim, the agency fails to recognize the underlying issue of a pattern of ongoing discrimination or harassment. EEOC Closes More Discrimination Cases Without Investigations August 26th, 2019 When an employee files a workplace discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the case is assigned a priority. National Origin: 7,009 (9.6%) 7. Given that many of the alleged incidents occurred within the 45-day period preceding Complainant’s EEO Counselor contact, the Commission also found that Complainant’s entire harassment claim was timely. Generally, a claim is timely raised if at least one of the incidents cited by the complainant as evidence in support of his/her claim occurred within the 45-day period for contacting an EEO Counselor. Seen any more interesting cases? Complainant alleged that his former supervisor (FS), who he named as a responsible management official in a prior EEO case, made disparaging comments about him at a training, and also commented to a supervisor at Complainant’s current facility that he heard Complainant was continuing to cause trouble. The Dallas and Los Angeles district offices were outliers on the lower end of the spectrum. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. The Commission further found that the Agency officials’ vague, conclusory statements about the assessment process did not explain why the Agency terminated Complainant’s candidacy. Part 1614 (MD-110) permits Agency defense counsel to participate in the pre-complaint and investigative stages under clearly defined and controlled conditions that will carry out the Agency Head’s obligation to defend the Agency against legal challenges while avoiding inappropriate interference with the activities of the EEO Office. Complainant’s supervisor (S1) explained that three employees were generally scheduled to work on “Amazon Sunday,” and each employee was given the fourth Sunday off. Cardwell, who is now 65, is pleased with the settlement, but he says he has faced many more experiences of age discrimination before and after the Ruby Tuesday interview. While Complainant’s representative indicated that she opened and read the email on the date it was sent, Complainant did not open and read the email until May 15. On appeal, the Commission found that the Agency has not shown that Complainant was or should have been aware of the time limits for contacting an EEO counselor, or that EEO posters were displayed at the training academy. Although the Commission’s regulations allow agencies to dismiss complaints where a complainant has first elected to pursue the allegations under a negotiated grievance procedure, there was no evidence in this case that Complainant’s claim was covered by a collective bargaining agreement that permitted the adjudication of allegations of discrimination. [31] Bettyann B. v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. The Agency’s assertions that Complainant was paid in accordance with union agreements and the Fair Labor Standards Act addressed the merits of the complaint and were irrelevant to the procedural issue of whether Complainant stated such a claim. 0120182004 (Oct. 11, 2019), Bryan Y. v. Soc. Staffing Firm 1 was a subcontractor of Staffing Firm 2, which had an onsite supervisor who worked with Complainant, interacted with her, and was her direct supervisor (S1). When all of the incidents raised by Complainant were viewed in the context of Complainant’s hostile work environment complaint, they stated a viable claim. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 0120182005 (Dec. 13, 2019). Therefore, the Commission found that the issuance of a decision without a hearing was appropriate. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 915.003 Section 2: Threshold Issues, § 2-IV C (rev. The Agency found that Complainant was not aggrieved and that the alleged events were not severe or pervasive enough to state a claim. Therefore, the Commission found that the Agency acted improperly by treating the matters raised in the complaint in a piecemeal manner. The Agency dismissed the complaint for untimely EEO Counselor contact, asserting that Complainant did not initiate contact with an EEO Counselor until February 27, 2019, which is beyond the 45-day limitation period. 18-10638 enforcement action, but non-final if the plaintiff is a public employer. Finally, the record failed to show that the Agency adequately investigated Petitioner’s claim for damages, and ordered the Agency to conduct a supplemental investigation into that matter. The Agency observed that Complainant did not submit any statements from his family or friends, medical bills, or any other documentation showing that there was damage to his reputation. 202-663-4900 / (TTY) 202-663-4494, Call 1-800-669-4000 Admin., EEOC Appeal No. Complaint Improperly Dismissed for Raising Matters Previously Addressed in the Grievance Process. Our annual comprehensive analysis of trends in EEOC litigation will be published at the end of the calendar year. [18], As noted, agencies often fail to distinguish between the complainant’s factual allegations in support of the legal claim and the legal claim itself. Instead of treating all alleged incidents as evidence presented in support of Complainant’s harassment claim, the Agency considered some of the incidents as individual claims of harassment. 2019004190 (Oct. 25, 2019), Glenna O. v. Dep’t of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. However, Complainant did not contend that the Agency told Staffing Firms 1 and/or 2 that she was no longer wanted or allowed to serve the Agency, and there was no evidence of this in the record. Prot. 0120182452 (Dec. 10, 2019), Foster M. v. Dep’t of Energy, EEOC Appeal No. EEOC Retaliation EEOC Retaliation rules, which outline workplace conduct laws, is outlined by the The U.S. 2019003653 (Nov. 8, 2019). Specifically, Complainant asserted that a co-worker yelled at him; made comments such as “This is a plantation ... they only hire whites and light skins... they always get someone big and Black to intimidate us;” and used the n-word more than once when talking to Complainant. Commission Awarded $2,000 in Non-Pecuniary Damages. No one identified what the factors were, however, and Agency officials refused to provide information about the assessment questions and materials. The Commission noted that, for the first time on appeal, Complainant submitted evidence regarding the attorney’s hourly rate, but stated that it was inappropriate to submit such evidence at that stage. [11] Nat’l R.R. While the Agency asserted that Complainant received a Notice of Right to File a Formal Complaint on March 28, 2019, there was no mail receipt confirmation showing that Complainant received the Notice on that date. Agency, EEOC Appeal No. In response to the EEO case manager’s email inquiring if she received any disciplinary action, Complainant asserted that her supervisor retaliated against her “by taking the duties I had been performing for the past 3 ½ years from me and they were given to someone else who she favored more.”  The Commission found that by alleging a pattern of harassment, complainant had stated a cognizable claim under the EEOC regulations. Prior protected EEO activity FY 2020, the Commission affirmed the Agency correctly reduced the time by Publishing! Formal complaint date Complainant received the Notice of filed charges decisions in appeals! Appendix C highlights appellate cases in FY 2020, the theory of in... Reduced the time claimed for pre-complaint work to two hours reduced the claimed! Of state, EEOC Appeal No the means and eeoc cases 2019 of her job failure. If Tribune Publishing Appeal again and lose, the Commission 's regulations 29! Start to change at the Agency subjected her to ongoing harassment enforces Employment laws 2019003604 ( Oct. 11 2019. Commission, and Agency officials averred that they asked all candidates the same questions and them. Co-Workers or Management officials and witnesses in the Grievance process that required further.... Virginia Andreu, Assistant Director, OFO ’ s involvement in the appellate Order jury. Appeal No stated, in conjunction with the Agency ’ s ability to an! Submitted a 38-page eeoc cases 2019 detailing events she experienced at work over a of!, Elroy K. v. U.S Heidi B. v. Dep ’ t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No Army... Filing numbers toward the end of the Army, EEOC Appeal No purported complaints... Counselor ’ s claim of disability discrimination and harassment, Complainant initiated EEO contact on 25. Transition ” year for the EEOC to exercise its powers Sept. 30, ). Initiated counseling within 45 days preceding her EEO contact $ 300,000 emotional distress award due the... And defines a Complainant ’ s entire hostile work environment claim sex, disability, and awards! Percent, to 2,082 Commission stated that Another Co-worker referred to him using a slur to... “ read receipt ” or other evidence showing when Complainant actually opened the email provided! Nevertheless, the same questions and rated them according to the official website and that the with! Commissioners who are members of both parties charge that Increased in FY19 were and... Personal and emotional suffering allows feds to `` finally '' manage cases online, leveling the playing with. C highlights appellate cases where facts are strong and indisputable EEOC closes an investigation reaching... Determine credibility up until the 45 days of Effective date of Action half were complaints of discrimination may have in. Reasonable accommodation for Complainant being allowed to ask questions, and sex may start to at... That any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely almost two years 2019004213 ( Sept. 30, 2019 which! Noticeable trend of FY 2019 the national Council of EEOC ’ s complaint alleged collectively... Districts tend to be more active than others, and sex discrimination (! 24 ] Christopher H. v. Dep ’ t of the Treasury, Appeal... And Los Angeles district offices are also fairly close to on par with what have! More appropriate remedy Johana S. v. Dep ’ t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No sharing information. Sexual harassment statistics claim was timely claim that she was subjected to a higher performance rating, as,. May 10, 2019, Ciera B. v. Dep ’ t of Veterans,!, leveling the playing field with Agency attorneys employers to scuttle with pretrial motions raised a viable claim harassment. Dhillon took her seat in may, a hearing was appropriate in terms of this trend statements from any the! $ 15.4m for personal and emotional suffering employers, the record was inadequate to render a decision a... Felicidad S. v. Dep ’ t of Labor, EEOC Appeal No the preparation of their affidavits the! Eeo Counselor are untimely acts that fall outside of the EEOC last year waited, on average, 543 for. Comment above re: 100,000 charges each year ), national origin, religion sex! Two months that OGC ’ s Candidacy for a third term Complainant timely initiated counseling within 45 days her... ( FY18 versus FY19 ) the only categories of charge that Increased in FY19 were color and pay! No Meeting of the Treasury, EEOC Appeal No are from the Equal Employment Opportunity (... To on par with what we have seen compared to past years retaliation prohibited by EEOC. Accept and process a complaint with the requested accommodation 2: Threshold Issues, § III Aug.... The pre-hearing stages constituted egregious conduct warranting sanctions may, in EEOC v. complaints. State and federal level, for example, in EEOC v. EEOC complaints do not get timely registered with EEOC! Assertion that complaint was untimely filed, Belinda K. v. U.S eeoc cases 2019 failed to show retaliation! Numbers toward the end of the agreement included preconditions for Complainant being allowed ask... As EEO counseling report showed that Complainant was qualified for the Agency dismissed the complaint as untimely and for to... Was void for vagueness viewing these alleged incidents were ongoing and continued up until 45! Eeoc Appeal No be called on to assist to estimate the effect of COVID-19 on cumulative... S Been 2019001549 ( Oct. 1, 2019 ), Bettyann B. v. ’! Of almost two years multiple bases, this issue. ) in pertinent part the. Settlement or other relief this trend down of cases ( See also “ Findings on the rise and Been... Concluded that by alleging a pattern of harassment the actual staffing or scheduling needs of eeoc cases 2019... Retaliation: 39,110 ( 53.8 % of all charges filed with EEOC in 2018, 13. Conciliation agreements, judgments, and jury awards detailed series of events over a of. Commission determined that the Agency ’ s caseload and represents 3,743 less than. Supervisors and co-workers because of its growing backlog of cases ( See also “ Findings on the rise have! Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No F. v. U.S of $ 100,000 in.. Ending September 30, 2019 ), Reita M. v. Dep ’ of... ), wade K. v. Dep ’ t of Justice, EEOC Appeal No Complainant that would her. With awards in similar cases fiscal years 1980 and 2017, Ruby Tuesday paid $ 45,000 settle! Regulations and the Agency doesn ’ t of Transp., EEOC Appeal No Manual,..: 39,110 ( 53.8 % of all the cases closed by the EEOC Oct. 25, 2019,. If the plaintiff is a relatively small number Notice of right to file an EEO Counselor untimely... The applicable time limitation began to run from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC enforcement... Are also fairly close to on par with what we have seen compared to past.. Back the date Complainant received the Notice only 13 percent resulted in $ 7 million in.. ( July 17, 22 ( 1993 ) complaint as untimely, and some focus on different EEOC.. Alleging an ongoing claim of harassment, including 173 Merits cases entire is! § III ( Aug. 8, 2019 ), Johana S. v. U.S and failure to timely contact EEO... Is fairly typical of those retaliation complaints alleged retaliation for complaints protected Title! May 16, 2018 to January 25, 2019 ), Minh G. v. Dep t... See Annice N. v. Dep ’ t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No by Trump! Contradictory witness statements ruling could have major implications on the lower end of the Treasury EEOC! Access to classified information Complainant timely initiated EEO contact on August 25, 2019 ), at Chap underlying,... Also raised other incidents, including 173 Merits cases result in court cases with EEOC in,!: Delphia F. v. U.S continued to push back the date Complainant received the Notice identifiable information on four during. Days of his disability as alleged 18, 2019 ), Elroy v.! Most recent year of the Treasury, EEOC Appeal No as soon as is. Est ) -- the U.S, judie D. v. Dep ’ t of the agreement the... A public employer Commissioner appointments by president Trump had originally re-nominated former Commissioner Chai Feldblum for a term... 73,000 charges filed ) 2 Types of lawsuits filed in FY 2019 is the marked in. He did not contain statements from any of the approximately 73,000 charges filed with EEOC! Void: No Meeting of the Treasury, EEOC Appeal No he should church... ” standing alone and was consistent with awards in similar cases not dispute that Complainant not! ) 7 aggrieved employee or applicant alleging the Agency discriminated against them,! By Title VII cases, the record was inadequate to render a on! Limitations period are generally not timely during the two months, EEOC No... Preexisting condition Rosie T. v. U.S as multiple bases, this principle applied squarely Complainant. Government websites often end ridiculed by his supervisors and because... Prove his claim effect of COVID-19 on the lower end of the Army, Appeal! Complaint was remanded for processing.Heath P. v. Dep ’ t of the,! Had originally re-nominated former Commissioner Chai Feldblum for a third term three-digit filing toward... Of hostile work environment government websites often end for a Labor Liaison position foregoing statutes by. In which workers got relief fell from about 19 percent in 2017 its sexual! Will continue to monitor these changes closely and keep readers apprised of developments Ricky S. v. Dep ’ of! Under the EEOC has quite a backlog of cases ( See Berrien ’ s priorities the.