PROBATIONER REINSTATED BY EEOC
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Marquis was a probationary employee working as a Shipfitter Apprentice in the Norfolk Naval Shipyard (NNYS or Shipyard) in Portsmouth, Virginia. Continue reading
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Marquis was a probationary employee working as a Shipfitter Apprentice in the Norfolk Naval Shipyard (NNYS or Shipyard) in Portsmouth, Virginia. Continue reading
Earlier this month we felt it important enough to remind readers that the EEOC and the U.S. Courts are putting a lot of pressure on employers to stop using phony-baloney, non-specific, smoke-and mirrors rating criteria to make personnel decisions. So, it was nice to see Forbes Magazine post a piece of its own yesterday making the same point. Check out their article entitled, “U.S. Courts Crack Down On Employers Using ‘Slippery’ Criteria To Hide Discrimination.” It backs up what we said and with the weight of the Forbes folks behind it should help push employers to move toward more objective decision-making factors.
Attacking the scores of a promotion rating panel is hard to do under traditional labor law. But, if you can find a reason to allege that there was not just a violation of a contract provision, such as the need for all promotion actions to be “systematic and equitable,” but also an EEO violation, you have a better chance of winning the case. EEO case law requires agency rating panels to carry a burden that most contract grievances do not. The latest example of this is a case (David T. v. Megan Brennan, Postmaster, EEOC No. 2019001172 (2019)) that resulted in an employee getting retroactively promoted and compensatory damages in addition to back pay. EEOC said the rating panel members “failed to provide any specificity when asked why successful candidates were recommended and why Complainant was not.” EEOC demands a lot of specificity that contract grievance arbitrators do not. For example, EEOC wrote … Continue reading
The short answer is that it’s something the agency must engage in to avoid violating the law and incurring huge financial penalties. The slightly longer answer is that it can often require an agency to bypass or waive its own rules and regulations to help an employee avoid losing his/her job or just some benefit of the job. A complete answer can be found in the new EEOC decision Irina T. v Robert Wilkie, Secretary, DVA, EEOC No. 0120180568 (2019) where an employee with a disability was denied a request for additional leave beyond what FMLA provides. Irina was a … Continue reading
If you are wondering why The Donald and his fellow tribesmen are bothering with union rights at a time when China, Iran, Moscow and a half-dozen other life-and-death threats are looming over our heads, here is a very thoughtful piece of journalism that spells out the very selfish reasons for the anti-union fire. hence, the Executive Orders designed to gut organized labor.
Our fellow bloggers at the Employment & Labor Insider have done Americans a great service bring bringing this national scourge to our attention. Please check out their posting entitled, “Lego-Based Workplace Harassment Will Not Be Tolerated.”