Developments at the EEOC: On January 3, 2017, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) published a Final Rule in the Federal Register, 82 Fed.Reg. 654-681. The Final Rule clarifies the federal government's obligations as a model employer of disabled individuals.
For the first time since 1998, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released proposed guidance earlier this year on how federal employment law applies to retaliation claims. In a nutshell, this new guidance could possibly extend the types of actions taken by federal (and private sector) employers that would constitute illegal retaliation.
If you are a federal employee facing allegations of poor work performance or wrongdoing, you may face severe disciplinary action called an "adverse action." Adverse actions may include a suspension (over 14 days), furlough (over 30 days) demotion or reduction in pay, or removal from your position, all of which can severely hurt your career opportunities.
Developments at the EEOC: On October 5, 2015, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a press release announcing a change in how it captions federal-sector decisions from the EEOC Office of Federal Operations (OFO). This change resolved a long-standing problem with giving the names of parties in the captions to OFO decisions.
Federal employees, like their private sector counterparts, have legal protections against discrimination. Under the law, it is illegal for federal employers to discriminate against an employee based on their:
Developments at the EEOC: In a landmark decision, Complainant v. Fox, Sec., Department of Transportation, Appeal No 0120133080 (July 15, 2015), the EEOC has held that a federal employee who brings a complaint of discrimination on account of sexual orientation states a claim under Title VII for discrimination on account of sex. This decision, issued by the EEOC's Office of Federal Operations (OFO), was issued over the signature of the EEOC's Executive Secretariat, which means that this decision was actually voted on by the Commissioners, not just issued by the OFO's Director.
Developments at the EEOC: On April 6, 2015, the General Services Administration (GSA) decided not to appeal the default judgment order imposed against it in EEOC No. 570-2012-00608X. GSA was sanctioned for its failure to timely investigate an EEO complaint, in a case where the Complainant did not receive the report of investigation from GSA until 506 days after the formal complaint, and 350 days after the last amendment.
Developments at the EEOC: On February 19, 2015, the EEOC's Office of Federal Operations (OFO) issued its decision in Meyer et al. v. Department of State, EEOC Request No. 0520140506. OFO upheld class certification for a claim against the State Department (Agency) of alleged disability discrimination in hiring for Foreign Service positions.
Developments at the EEOC: On January 28, 2015, the EEOC's Office of Federal Operations (OFO) issued its decision in Complainant v. Dept. of the Air Force, EEOC Appeal No. 0120142407. OFO found that the Complainant, a federal contractor, was able to press a discrimination complaint against the Air Force (Agency) through the federal-sector EEO process.
Developments at the EEOC: On February 6, 2015, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) in the Federal Register (80 Fed.Reg. 6,669-6,671). In the ANPRM, the EEOC requests public comment on all aspects of its federal-sector EEO complaints adjudication process, potentially contemplating a future revision of that process.