1 / 28

EEO Case Update

EEO Case Update. Don Names. Transgender Status States Claim under Title VII. Day v. USPS , EEOC Appeal No. 0120122376 (2/19/13) EEOC reiterates its holding in Macy v. DOJ that claim of discrimination on basis of transgender status states a claim of gender discrimination.

tola
Download Presentation

EEO Case Update

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EEO Case Update Don Names

  2. Transgender Status States Claim under Title VII • Day v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 0120122376 (2/19/13) • EEOC reiterates its holding in Macy v. DOJ that claim of discrimination on basis of transgender status states a claim of gender discrimination.

  3. No HarassmentFeces Happens! • Hillyer v. Interior, EEOC Appeal No. 0120093623 (8/16/12). • Supervisor places feces on employee’s chair. • EEOC finds action “highly inappropriate,” but not due to protected status or prior EEO activity.

  4. Sex-Based Harassment • Leggett et al v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 0720110039 (7/12/12) • Group of women were subjected to harassment on basis of sex by co-worker, resulting in total damages of $428,000.

  5. Class Complaint Prevails • Garcia v. DOJ (DEA), EEOC Appeal No. 0120122033 (6/7/13) • Class of female Special Agents found to be discriminated against in selection for foreign assignments. • Att’y fees top $1,000,000! Ka-ching!!

  6. Sanction on Appeal • Tsosie v. Interior (BIA), EEOC Appeal No. 0120081612 (8/31/12) • EEOC sanctions agency for failure to submit ROI on appeal, resulting in finding of hostile work environment on bases of sex and retaliation.

  7. Reasonable Accommodation Denied • Blocher v. VA, EEOC Appeal No. 0120111937 (1/31/13) • Agency assertion that supervisors may not telework not sufficient to support denial of request for accommodation.

  8. Agency Fails to Engage in Interactive Process • Underwood v. SSA, EEOC Appeal No. 0720120001 (1/18/13) • Agency fails to engage in interactive process after receiving medical report with diagnosis and request for accommodation.

  9. Failure to Reassign to Light Duty a Violation • Abeijon v. DHS, EEOC Appeal No. 0120080156 (8/8/12) • Agency denial of reassignment to light duty found unlawful when complainant could not perform essential functions of current job.

  10. Denial of Reasonable Accommodation • Pitts v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 0120130039 (3/13/13) • Denial of administrative leave for employee with kidney disease when restrooms were not working found to be unlawful.

  11. No Duty to Accommodate Employee’s Family Member • Davis v. Interior (BIA), EEOC Appeal No. 0120123517 (2/12/13) • Rehabilitation Act does not require accommodation for spouse of federal employee who was not a federal employee or applicant.

  12. Compensatory Damages • Spence v. NRC, EEOC Appeal No 0120093196 (9/13/12) • Agency award of $100,000 for delay of 2 years in providing reasonable accommodation of telework affirmed by EEOC.

  13. Compensatory Damages • Austin v. VA, EEOC Appeal No. 0120112574 (7/19/12) • EEOC awards $100,000 in damages for extreme emotional distress resulting from denial of reasonable accommodation.

  14. Compensatory Damages • Bennett v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 0120121982 (4/19/13) • EEOC awards $2,500 for technical violation of confidentiality provisions of Rehabilitation Act (medical information improperly released).

  15. Compensatory Damages • Carter v. VA, EEOC Appeal No. 0120122266 (10/18/12) • $500 damages award for per se violation of anti-retaliation provisions of Title VII, taking into account agency actions and harm.

  16. Compensatory Damages • Zehe v. NASA, EEOC Appeal No 0120113282 (3/26/13) • “Outright denial” of telework as a reasonable accommodation deprives agency of “good faith” effort exception to damages award.

  17. Compensatory Damages • Rathore v. DOD (Defense Security Service), EEOC Appeal No. 0120114330 (2/14/13) • Agency’s failure to provide interpreter in 4 of 11 requests did not constitute “good faith” efforts to avoid damages.

  18. Compensatory Damages • Donahoe v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 0120120185 (3/14/13) • EEOC awards $18,000 in damages for depression following discriminatory removal (Hispanic), but denies compensation for loss of home.

  19. No Improper Disclosure of Confidential Medical Info. • Debacker v. DOJ, EEOC Appeal No. 0120120307 (1/24/13) • Commission finds agency acted lawfully when EAP counselor notified security that complainant was suicidal and had access to firearm.

  20. No Improper Disclosure by EEO Investigator • Davis v. Treasury, EEOC Appeal No. 0120102597 (6/21/12) • Release of description of disability (recovering alcoholic/addict) to co-worker witnesses during EEO investigation not a violation.

  21. Medical Files Taken Home Violate Confidentiality • Gray v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 0120121846 (9/10/12) • Postmaster who kept complainant’s medical records in closet at home violated confidentiality provisions of Rehabilitation Act.

  22. Improper Disability-Related Inquiry • Bozeman v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 0120120923 (5/3/13) • Pre-employment inquiry by selecting official regarding complainant’s medical restrictions violates Rehabilitation Act.

  23. Improper Disability-Related Inquiry • Uchtman v. USDA, EEOC Appeal No. 0120110532 (2/27/13) • Supervisor’s question as to what type of medication complainant was taking found to be unlawful under Rehabilitation Act.

  24. Fitness for Duty Exam • Sanders v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 0120130214 (4/3/13) • No violation of restrictions on disability related medical exams when complainant posed direct threat due to medical condition.

  25. Race Discrimination Found • Broomfield v. Treasury, EEOC Appeal No. 0720110038 (3/26/13) • Police Officer at Denver Mint subjected to disparate treatment and hostile work environment due to his race (African American).

  26. Race-Based Harassment • Bryant v. Interior (Park Service), EEOC Appeal No. 0120091468 (8/31/12) • EEOC finds complainant subjected to racial harassment and agency was liable due to failure to take prompt and appropriate corrective action.

  27. Per Se Retaliation • King v. International Boundary and Water Commission, EEOC Appeal No. 0120112384 (3/19/13) • Supervisor informing co-workers of complaint reasonably likely to deter protected activity.

  28. That’s All Folks! • Questions?

More Related