![3 days to digest mercy ending 3 days to digest mercy ending](https://www.writersdigest.com/.image/ar_1:1%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_1200/MTcxMDY5NDY1NzIxMzE3MzYx/image-placeholder-title.png)
Complainant claimed, among other things, that the Agency refused to pay him for eight hours of official time while he was attending to EEO matters. 0120141580 (July 20, 2016).Ĭlaim Regarding Denial of Official Time Not Processed as Separate Complaint. Ordering a supplemental investigation, the Commission reminded the Agency that while its burden of production is not onerous, it must provide a specific, clear, and individualized explanation for its action so that Complainant is provided with an opportunity to prove that the Agency's explanation is a pretext for discriminatory animus.
![3 days to digest mercy ending 3 days to digest mercy ending](https://pm1.narvii.com/7502/7b5346744c78cdf5d0e38c069b9bc6506fd628e8r1-1440-720v2_00.jpg)
![3 days to digest mercy ending 3 days to digest mercy ending](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/410Mg7-kZdL.jpg)
The manager responsible for implementing the reassignment did not provide an affidavit or statement despite the investigator's documented efforts to obtain information from him. The investigative record also failed to set forth the Agency's articulated reason for imposing an involuntary reassignment on Complainant. The Commission noted that the investigation failed to acquire information necessary to prove an essential element of Complainant's prima facie case, specifically, evidence of the races of the comparators identified by Complainant who were allegedly allowed to remain on detail. On appeal from the Agency's decision finding no discrimination, the Commission found that the investigative record was inadequate. Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against her on the bases of race, disability, age, and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when she was involuntarily reassigned. Ed.) SELECTED EEOC DECISIONS Agency ProcessingĬommission Found the Investigation Was Inadequate. This change was made to address privacy concerns and to ensure consistency with the Commission's approach in the rest of its enforcement work and the investigations of complaints. This randomly generated name consisted of a first name and last initial, and was assigned using a computer program that selects names from a list of pseudonyms bearing no relation to the complainant's actual name. During Fiscal Year 2016, the Commission redacted Complainants' names when it published decisions, and all federal sector appellate decisions issued for publication used a randomly generated name as a substitute for the name of the complainant. For summaries of decisions involving claims of harassment, see by statute as well as under multiple bases. The summaries are neither intended to be exhaustive or definitive as to the selected subject matter, nor are they to be given the legal weight of case law in citations. The Digest is now available online through EEOC's homepage at (Volume 1 of the Fiscal Year 2017 Digest contains a sampling of summaries of decisions of note from Fiscal Year 2016, some appearing in previous issues, selected by the staff of the Digest from among the volume of decisions the EEOC issued during that fiscal year. Writers: Shirin Baradaran, Robyn Dupont, Evan Holland, Sarah Legault, Erin Perugini, Navarro Pulley, Laura Revolinski, Aaron Rubin, Margaret Ruckelshaus, Scott Schaefer Jamie Price, Assistant Director, OFO's Special Operations Division The Digest of EEO Law is a quarterly publication of EEOC's Office of Federal Operations (OFO)