A deaf/Hard of Hearing employee could read lips in one-on-one conversations, but needed an accommodation to participate in group conversations. Consequently, his performance suffered and the agency put him on a PIP, which ended in his termination. But…

the employee charged the agency with a failure to reasonably accommodate his disability with the result that he was denied a legitimate PIP opportunity to show he can do the job with an accommodation. EEOC agreed writing, “We also find that, without providing effective accommodation, Complainant was not provided with an equitable opportunity to successfully complete the PIP started in March 2020.”

The employee was reinstated along with three years of back pay. It is  a good case to show that it is possible to challenge the validity of a PIP separate from any ultimate adverse action.  For more details, check out Arnulfo T., v. Lloyd J. Austin III, Sec’y, DoD (DCAA), EEOC No. 2021003604 (2023)


About AdminUN

FEDSMILL staff has over 40 years of federal sector labor relations experience on the union as well as management side of the table and even some time as a neutral.
This entry was posted in EEO/Disabilities, Unacceptable Performance and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.