usps eeoc settlements 2020

Agency did not show that employment of Complainant in Deportation Officer position would pose a direct threat where Medical Review Board made a blanket determination that Complainants medication created a potential risk of injury while performing Deportation Officers duties, but the Board ignored his work history in a similarly strenuous law enforcement position and discounted the opinion of his cardiologist. She alleged that the USPS has subjected her to disability discrimination and harassment. We thank you all for your continued patience with this process. Agency properly dismissed complaint as untimely filed where Agency notified Complainant of applicable filing deadline and proper address to file her complaint with the Agency but Complainant nonetheless sent the complaint to the EEOC's Office of Federal Operations. Complainant, the only African-American plumber at the facility where he worked, was subjected to a hostile work environment based on race when coworkers tampered with his toolbox and left notes in it saying that African Americans did not have the skill sets to be plumbers, attempted to restrain him to a chair with a metal clamp, referred to him as a goat, and duct-taped him to a chair; the Agency was liable for the racial harassment because it did not take immediate and appropriate corrective action after Complainant reported the first, toolbox incident. 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. Find your nearest EEOC office The AJ took account of several factors that limited Complainants non-pecuniary damages award, found that the Agency was not the sole cause of Complainants emotional and psychological harm, and limited the award of pecuniary damages to the amounts contained in "legitimate receipts.". 0120131989 (Oct. 26, 2016), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120131989.txt. 0120170362 (Feb. 21, 2019), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120170362.pdf. 0120160543 (Jan. 14, 2021), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/2021-01/0120160543.pdf. 536 0 obj <>stream 0120181844 (Sept. 10, 2019), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120181844.pdf. 1-844-234-5122 (ASL Video Phone) 0120172637 (Mar. info@eeoc.gov For Deaf/Hard of Hearing callers: 0120181309 (Aug. 30, 2019), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120181309.pdf. Barbara S. v. U.S. 20, 2019), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120171870.pdf. The program sought to significantly cut labor costs for USPS, which faced increasing operating costs from fuel price increases, decreasing revenue from reductions in the use of priority services like first-class mail, as well as increasing competition for the delivery of packages and urgent mail from giant logistics corporations like UPS and FedEx. All Rights Reserved, Disclaimer| Site Map| Privacy Policy |Business Development Solutions by FindLaw, part of Thomson Reuters, EEOC Awards $165,000 in Compensatory Damages, Adverse Action Not Permitted for Use of Approved Leave, Adverse Inference for Failure to Produce Documents, Agency Liable for Actions of Subordinate Employee, Agency Rationale Found to Be Pretext for Bias, Arbitral Review of Adverse Actions, Part 1, Attorney Fees Awarded Where Penalty Mitigated, Award Increased in Discrimination Finding, Benefit of Doubt when Representing Oneself, Board Clarifies Jurisdiction for Disabled Veterans, Career Intern Program Violates Veterans Preference, Claim against Agency by IPA Employee Allowed, Claim for Damages and Fees Gets Second Look, Complainants Role in EEO Investigation Part 2, Constructive Notice Bars Summary Judgment, Court Finds No Adverse Employment Action or Reprisal, Court Remands Case for Review of Suggestion Award, Court Rules Against Former Spouse Survivor Annuity, Definition of Disability under the Rehabilitation Act, Disability Discrimination by State Department, Disability Retirement and Discrimination Claims, Discrimination Due to Age, Union Activities, EEO Representative Has Viable Claim of Retaliation, EEOC Awards Substantial Compensatory Damages, EEOC Denies Agencys Request for Reconsideration, EEOC Sustains Discrimination Claim of FAA Employee, Employee Not Entitled to Accommodation for Spouse, Employee Wins at EEOC after Decade-Long Fight, Equal Pay Act Plaintiffs Must Prove Sex Discrimination, Failure to Comply with Law Judges Orders, Failure to Reassign Violates Rehabilitation Act, FEGLI Beneficiary Designation Trumps State Law, Genetic Information Nondiscrimination, Part 1, Genetic Information Nondiscrimination, Part 2, Going Straight to Court with EEO Complaint, Harassment Based on Perceived Sexual Orientation, Hearing Ordered in Involuntary Resignation Case, Hostile Work Environment and Compensation Claims, Hostile Work Environment Harassment Based on Gender, Importance of Impartial Investigations Stressed, Jurisdiction Argument after Delay in Appeal, Lateral Transfer Can be Adverse Job Action, Mixed Motives in Age Discrimination Cases, Modification of Work Schedule as Reasonable Accommodation, MSPB Applies Ruling Limiting Appeal Rights, MSPB Jurisdiction Over Newer FAA Employees, MSPB May Review OPM Suitability Determinations, MSPB Mitigates Penalty for Hatch Act Violation, MSPB Upholds Former Park Police Chiefs Removal, MSPB Upholds Removal for False Medal Claim, New Decision on Management-Directed Reassignment, NSPS Cant Impose New Probationary Period, Performance Improvement Plan Not an Adverse Action, Physician Protected Under Whistleblower Law, Pre-Enactment USERRA Jurisdiction Affirmed By Federal Circuit, Protections for Legislative Branch Employees, Reassignment of Harassment Victim Reversed, Recommended Changes to EEOC Regulations and Procedures, Resignation Reversed Due to Misinformation, Retaliation Not Covered in Age Discrimination Case, Revocation of Accommodation may be Discriminatory, Sleep Impairment a Disability Under Rehabilitation Act, Suit against Manager in Personal Capacity, Supervisors Comments Could Have Chilling Effect, Supporting a Hostile Work Environment Claim, Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Cats Paw Theory, Supreme Court Simplifies Mixed Case Appeals, Survivor Lacks Standing to Bring EEO Claim, Telecommuting as Reasonable Accommodation, Temporary Demotion States Cause of Action, Threat of Discipline Found to be Reprisal, Tolling of Deadlines for Filing Veterans Preference Complaints, TSA Not Immune To Rehabilitation Act Claims, TSA Screener Applicants Exempt from Rehabilitation Act, U.S. District Court Denies Summary Judgment, Unionists Access to Agency System Upheld, Untimely Disability Retirement Application, Whistleblower Compensation Provision Not Retroactive, Whistleblower Legislation Advances in Congress, Whistleblower Reprisal Found, Relief Ordered. Velva B. v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. Sharon S. v. Dep't of Defense, EEOC Appeal No. 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. Postal Service (USPS) has agreed to pay nearly $17.3 million to settle allegations that the agency discriminated against employees with disabilities. A lock ( 1-844-234-5122 (ASL Video Phone), Call 1-800-669-4000 2019002953 (Jan. 27, 2020), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2020_08_10/2019002953.pdf. The Commission found that the Agency complied with the terms of a settlement agreement, including the provision of accepting a letter of resignation from Complainant. Sheila D. v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Petition No. Wes S. v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. The Commission had previously found discrimination in EEOC Appeal No. The EEOC has tremendous flexibility when deciding whether to sue an employer or accept an employer's offer to settle. 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. Many noteworthy federal appellate decisions are frequently used as a part of the Commission's outreach and training efforts. Complainant raised his reasonable-accommodation claim in a timely manner; the duty to provide reasonable accommodation is ongoing and, at the time that he contacted the EEO Counselor, Complaint was alleging that the Agency remained unwilling to provide him with reasonable accommodation. v. United States Postal Service anAJ decision certified the following class: All permanent rehabilitation employees and limited duty employees at the U.S. Margaret M. v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. On July 15, 2022, USPS submitted a spreadsheet to the EEOC Administrative Judge, and also to us as Phase I Class Counsel. Padilla v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 0 1-800-669-6820 (TTY) Arbitration Awards & Settlements Arbitration Clerk Jobs Bargaining Unit Work The class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of 41,000 past and current USPS workers whose hours may have been restricted because of permanent disabilities from 2000-2012. 1-844-234-5122 (ASL Video Phone), Call 1-800-669-4000 Kristofer D. v. Dep't of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 19, 2021), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2021_04_30/2021001898.pdf. 0120151360 (July 28, 2017), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120151360.txt. Bart M. v. Dep't of the Interior, EEOC Appeal No. Your claim in this case is a personal asset. Jess P. v. Dep't of Homeland Security, EEOC Appeal No. This resulted in an award of $15,000 in non-pecuniary damages as the agency claimed that Padilla had not experienced any long-term mental or physical illness nor any emotional harm. Sang G. v. Dep't of Homeland Security, EEOC Appeal No. hb```,,K@( She alleged discrimination based on race, national origin, and sex. The reissued Postal Service's Policy on Workplace Harassment is available on the Postal Service PolicyNet website: n Go to blue.usps.gov. death spawn osrs. The U.S. For questions or concerns please contact our offices: Thomas & Solomon LLP - [About the Firm] 693 East Avenue Rochester, NY 14607 (877) 272-4066 (telephone M-F 8:30AM-5:30PM EST) (585) 272-0574 (facsimile) Joan S. v. Dep't of Homeland Security, EEOC Appeal No. 19), the U.S. 1-844-234-5122 (ASL Video Phone) Marquis K. v. Dep't of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. That class action complaint, covering all injured-on-duty employees who were reassessed under the NRP during the period 5/5/06 through 7/1/11, was decided by the EEOC in September 2017 and finalized in a March 9, 2018 decision. Permanent Workforce: 622,045 Temporary Workforce: 85,843 Total Workforce: 707,888. Requiring Complainant to seek assistance in opening doors from security guards and coworkers did not provide her with an effective accommodation; Agency's eventual installation of automatic doors demonstrated that this accommodation was not an undue hardship. It is not an effective accommodation to require an employee with a disability to take leave when another accommodation would enable the employee to continue working, and it is not the agency's role to dictate what type of assistive or monitoring device the employee uses. https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0520130618.txt. Removing Complainant from the workplace by placing her on administrative leave did not insulate the Agency from liability for sexual harassment; reassigning the person targeted for harassment is not appropriate corrective action. 16, 2019), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120170582.pdf. On September 1, 2022 Arbitrator Joseph M. Sharnoff issued his latest national-level RI-399 award, this one concerning the Automated Delivery Unit Sorter (ADUS). Wilfredo M. v. Dep't of Treasury, EEOC Appeal No. Speaking of Special Interest Groups it is pathetic. Margeret M. v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. The Agency discriminated against Complainant based on his disability when it failed to provide him with a reasonable accommodation in a timely manner and when it delayed his promotion. 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. 1-800-669-6820 (TTY) Leora R. v. Dep't of Health and Human Services, EEOC Appeal No. 20, 2018), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120160256.txt. USPS timely processed 99.5% of the 17,054 pre-complaint counselings (without remands) completed in FY 2009. The ADUS award was the last in a series of four RI-399 craft jurisdiction awards that (This article first appeared in the November/December issue of the American Postal Worker magazine) Agency did not establish that its "sit and reach" requirement for a Wildlife Refuge Specialist position was job related and consistent with business necessity where no Agency witness was able to articulate how the ability to reach over one's toes while sitting down with legs outstretched was related to any of the functions of the position. The final ruling from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission came more than 10 years after a former employee first filed a class complaint alleging USPS subjected employees to a "pattern. Supervisor's instruction that Complainant and her subordinates not speak Tagalog when discussing work topics was an English-only rule that was not justified by business necessity because there was no evidence that the rule was necessary for the safe or efficient operation of the Agency. 0120161017 (May 29, 2018), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120161017.txt. Republican President Donald Trump has unleashed new threats to privatize the USPS in recent years, against which thousands of postal workers in cities across the US protested in 2018. The US Postal Department had been a cabinet department of the executive branch since 1872. According to the USPS' own written policy, "managers and supervisors are responsible for preventing harassment and inappropriate behavior could lead to illegal harassment and must respond. We are looking for people who may have been affected by the unlawful discrimination alleged in these suits. USPS employee wins discrimination and harassment claim with the EEOC. Rick G. v. Dep't of Homeland Security, EEOC Appeal No. Thomas Purviance had been employed by the U.S. in St. Louis for over three decades at the time that he was called names and mistreated by one of his USPS managers. LockA locked padlock 5, 2020), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2020_08_10/0120180519.pdf. Silas T. v. Dep't of the Air Force, EEOC Appeal No. The suit alleges that the USPS routinely harassed and discriminated against injured workers and refused to provide reasonable accommodations to workers who had become disabled as a result of their injuries. LockA locked padlock USPS has taken steps, and described . Lara G. v Postmaster General, EEOC Req. We hope to have some good progress on final awards during 2021, and we will continue to post updates on this website. 15, 2016), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120123215.txt. 2019004326 (Sept. 30, 2020), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2020_12_07/2019004326.pdf. 131 M Street, NE 2019001468 (June 5, 2019), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/2019001468.pdf. 0720170019 (Aug. 3, 2018), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0720170019.txt. Substantial evidence supported Administrative Judge's determination that Complainant did not show that he personally was subjected to conduct sufficiently severe or pervasive to create a hostile work environment based on race where Complainant did not witness most of the racially insensitive incidents alleged, he learned of the conduct second or third hand, he did not work at the office when the offensive conduct occurred, and the offensive behavior was not directed toward him; agreeing with the AJ's finding that the office where the conduct occurred was rife with offensive and racially hostile behavior, and given that substantial evidence established that other African-American employees were subjected to race-based conduct, the decision ordered the Agency to conduct training, to consider disciplining several identified Agency employees, and to post a notice. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. This means a settlement from the EEOC or business is not accepted and the victim decides to take the matter to court. She further alleged the USPS retaliated against her for prior EEO action from 2005-2006. 2019005682 (Apr. The settlement directed the Postal Service to pay $44.8 million directly to clerks and establish an escrow of $11.2 million to be disbursed in a manner determined by the union. 26, 2019), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120172637.pdf. Reita M. v. Agency for International Development, EEOC Appeal No. March 1, 2023 12:32 pm. 0120141484 (Jan. 30, 2017), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120141484.txt. Costs USPS agreed to pay $840,044 for 4,584 pre-complaint settlements, of which 433 were monetary settlements averaging $1,940. 0120180641 (Aug. 6, 2020), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2020_12_07/0120180641.pdf. Heidi B. v. Dep't of Health and Human Services, EEOC Appeal No. Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 0120162182 (Dec. 8, 2017), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120162182.txt. Update: McConnell vs USPS NRP EEOC Class Action Lawsuit Posted on December 14, 2020 by postal A class action complaint for injured on duty postal employees was certified by an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) on May 30,2008. The claims, evidence, and legal briefs for all of our clients relief claims have been submitted to the EEOC Administrative Judge. Share sensitive The appellate decision affirmed an Administrative Judge's award of $200,000.00 in non-pecuniary compensatory damages and $223,116.35 in pecuniary compensatory damages. Brendon L. v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. Alesia P. v. Dep't of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. Heidi B. v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. %%EOF A lock ( 2020001428 (Aug. 13, 2020), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2020_12_07/2020001428.pdf. First time EEO efile user? Administrative Judge properly determined that, where Complainant (through a retainer agreement) was being provided legal services at a reduced rate based on public-interest-minded reasons, the proper hourly rate was the prevailing rate at the time of the fee petition rather than the historical rate at the time the work was performed. 6, 2017), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120161068.txt. Within the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP), the Division of Federal Employees' Compensation (DFEC) is responsible for processing claims filed by Postal Service employees. Lauralee C. v. Dep't of Homeland Security, EEOC Appeal No. Edward W. v. Social Security Admin., EEOC Appeal No. For our 2021 report, we analyzed USPS data from fiscal years 2016 through 2020 to determine turnover and injury rates. Administrative Judge's remedial order requiring Agency to develop and adopt policies and procedures concerning the recruitment and selection of employees for non-competitive, temporary positions and to ensure equal opportunity and consideration in the selection process was appropriate. Substantial evidence supported Administrative Judge's finding that Agency discriminated against Complainant on the bases of race (African American) and sex (male) when it terminated his employment for alleged insubordination and misconduct; AJ found that evidence substantiated Complainant's perception that supervisor regarded him as a "big, Black man" and racially stereotyped his behavior as aggressive and intimidating. IV. We wanted to reach out and give a quick update on the case, and answer some questions that have been raised. 0120170582 (Apr. information only on official, secure websites. The DFEC Web site provides very useful information regarding the claims process. The EEOC recognizes this crisis affects all federal employees, complainants, and others involved in the EEO process. Please know that we are fighting for you, just as we have done for over 10 years. info@eeoc.gov 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. Complainant not entitled to award of Thrift Savings Plan reimbursements where there was no evidence that she participated in the program. 14, 2021), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2021_08_31/2020005108.pdf. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) discrimination allegations. Agency liable for harassment and constructive discharge based on sexual orientation where, although Agency removed the harasser from the work schedule at the restaurant where she and Complainant worked pending an investigation, it allowed her to return as a customer--where she continued to harass and threaten Complainant with bodily harm--and it then returned her to the work schedule; under these circumstances, it was reasonable for Complainant to feel so threatened that he resigned. 2020001035 (May 20, 2021), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2021_08_31/2020001035.pdf. For our clients, please provide your updated contact information to us. In either event, the complaint process will be suspended for 90 pending the outcome of the settlement discussions. Here their was no support from the union. 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. Amina W. v. Dep't of the Treasury, EEOC Appeal Nos. Of the 5,659 complaints filed at USPS, 1,283 contained allegations of race (Black/African American) discrimination, 570 contained allegations of race (White) discrimination, 128 contained allegations of race (Asian) discrimination, 17 contained allegations of race (American Indian/Alaska Native) discrimination, 757 contained allegations of color discrimination and 2,533 contained allegations of disability discrimination. USPS' average time for completing an investigation was 113 days. The EEOC then awarded her an additional $10,000 in non-pecuniary damages. 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. Arnoldo P. v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. You do what they say, not what they do. Malinda F. v. Dep't of the Air Force, EEOC Appeal No. 2021001514 (June 28, 2021), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2021_08_31/2021001514.pdf. Secure .gov websites use HTTPS Mail sorters must routinely squat and lift heavy bins of mail over 70 pounds, which can cause knee, back and rotator cuff injuries. It experienced five straight years of operating losses between 20112016 with the majority of its deficit coming from $5.8 billion in accruals of unpaid mandatory retiree health insurance payments. Their is no accountability in Michigan, so why would i be surprised !. 0120170604 (Mar. ) or https:// means youve safely connected to the .gov website. 2020004360 and 2020004343 (Nov. 4, 2020), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2020_12_07/2020004360-2020004343.pdf. 2019005824 (Dec. 7. If it is found that you meet the legal criteria for reinstatement, the Judge can order USPS to give you back the job you held before the NRP. Neither did the unions make any effort to unite USPS workers with their class brothers and sisters across the border during the 2018 strike of 50,000 Canadian postal workers, who were also fighting against a brutal profit-driven work regimen where real wages had fallen and understaffing led to speedup and heavy workloads that caused an accident rate among postal workers to be five times that of the average rate for federally regulated industries. Sherrie M. v. U.S. 0120182095 (June 23, 2021), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2021_08_31/0120182095.pdf. The EEOC . 0120122795 (Feb. 23, 2016), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/migrated_files/decisions/0120122795.txt. Where there is an actionable third-party retaliation, both the employee who engaged in the protected activity and the third party who is subjected to the materially adverse action may state a claim. 0120162040 (Apr. A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. The EEOC recently awarded $165,000 in non-pecuniary damages for pain and suffering to an employee of the U.S. The USPS increased its productivity each year from 20002007 mainly through automation, route optimization and through facility consolidation. 2020002487 (Dec. 29, 2020), https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/decisions/2021_01_25/2020002487.pdf. 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. Bertram K. v. Dep't of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. The struggles the Craft has faced over the Financial Issues for Local, State Union Officers, Arbitrator Sharnoff Issues National-Level Award on ADUS Craft Jurisdiction, Das Issues Remedy Award on PM End of Day Button Case, Arbitrator Sustains APWUs Position on Clerk Craft Jurisdiction over Parcel Sorting Work, Taking the MVS Craft Forward One Step at a Time.