AGENCY’S PRE-SELECTION SCAMMERS SNARED

I am sure union reps have seen these same facts hundreds of times in their own agencies.  Management announced a promotion opportunity, and after it passed over the person EEOC ultimately declared to be “vastly superior” to the selectee the record showed the following:

• Agency could not to explain why Complainant’s/Grievant’s interview performance was inferior to that of the Selectee,
• There were no interview score sheets or interview notes of the interview panelists,
• Under oath at the EEO hearing the interview panelists could not provide “a clear and detailed description of the specific responses Complainant and [Selectee] provided for each interview question.”
• The agency was unable to point to any evidence other than the employee’s interview as to why she was not selected.

We like these non-selection cases because they give us very tangible things to look for when examining our own members’ non-selection grievance.

This employee wound up with a promotion retroactive to 2013 and an order that the agency consider disciplining five (5) management officials who were involved in the scam.

Although the employee could get retroactive promotion and backpay, as well as attorney fees and interest on his back pay, that is only because he proved an EEO violation.  Had he raised this as a grievance merely claiming a contract violation, his remedy likely would have been limited to priority consideration.  That is yet another reminder to include EEO allegations in your grievances.  Even if you cannot prove them, you lose nothing.

For more details check out Clarine L., v. Pete Buttigieg, Sec’t’y, Dep’t of Transportation (FAA), EEOC Request No. 2022005084 (2023), Appeal No. 2020005402