EEOC ALLOWS GAY NASA EMPLOYEE TO REASSIGN HIS SUPERVISOR

We pay NASA employees to keep their head in the clouds—in a good way, but how could they have missed that it is against the law to discriminate against gay employees? Standing too close to the rocket fuel fumes? In any event, when a high-level administrator was found to have discriminated against a gay employee, EEOC ordered that the employee be allowed to determine whether the administrator stayed in the same chain of command as he or had to move to a different part of the organization.  Here is how they put their order, followed by a list of the things the administrator did to earn this very unusual penalty.

The final EEOC order read:

Unless he expressly consents, Complainant shall no longer work in a supervisory chain involving S1 [the individual identified 2019002240 as the Acting Associate Administrator]. Complainant may be reassigned to a comparable position only with his consent. Otherwise, the Agency shall remove S1 from Complainant’s chain of supervision. (See Felix R. v. Steve Jurczyk Acting Administrator, NASA, EEOC No. 2019002240 (2002))

Here is what the administrator did to lose that control over his career.

Beginning March 6, 2017, Felix was subjected to a hostile work environment, including but not limited to:

1. On several unspecified dates during the summer of 2017, the Acting Associate Administrator referred to previous leadership within the ODEO, which included Felix, as the “gay mafia.”
2. On an unspecified date in April 2017, the Acting Associate Administrator, during an office retreat, said “…[Felix] came out to me last week. I said, ‘Oh really Barry Manilow.”
3. On an unspecified date in June 2017, the Acting Associate Administrator uttered “these people just won’t let it alone,” referring to NASA’s LGBT group inquiring about the President’s proclamation for LGBT Pride Month.
4. In late July 2017, the Acting Associate Administrator commented that she guessed “…you white guys’ll do,” in the acting position of Complaints Management Director, ODEO.
5. On an unspecified date, after receiving the outcome of the anti-harassment complaint that Complainant filed against the Acting Associate Administrator, she showed concerns regarding comments she made to Felix which he believes were retaliatory based on his raising EEO concerns.
6. On an unspecified date in August 2017, after interviewing a white male candidate, the Acting Associate Administrator commented that the candidate was gay, and not a “good fit” for the organization because his personality was “too big for this office.”
7. On April 30, 2018, Felix became aware that the Acting Associate Administrator was selected for the position of Director, Program Planning Evaluation (PPE) Division, Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity (ODEO), which is the position Complainant was placed into after his removal from his SES position.