Alan Lescht Logo

Hello, you are using an old browser that's unsafe and no longer supported. Please consider updating your browser to a newer version, or downloading a modern browser.

Case SUMMARY

VA admitted retaliating against employee for EEO activity

Complainant v. U.S. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Case Nos. 451-2016-00108X, 451-2019-00145X

Our client worked for Veterans Affairs (VA) as a Biomedical Equipment Support Specialist.  We filed an EEO complaint with the VA, alleging that our client was subjected to discrimination on the basis of his age and retaliation for engaging in protected EEO activity.  After the Agency completed its investigation, we requested a Final Agency Decision (FAD).  A FAD is a written decision issued by the agency, itself.  In nearly every single case, the agency, of course, concludes that it did not discriminate or retaliate.

However, in this case, the VA admitted that it unlawfully retaliated against our client for his protected EEO activity when it gave him a lower performance rating in 2018.  The VA invited us to present evidence to support an award of compensatory damages for pain and suffering, as well as for reimbursement of attorney’s fees and costs.  The VA also ordered mandatory EEO training for our client’s supervisor, for leadership to consider taking disciplinary action against the supervisor, and posting of a notice about the finding of retaliation.

Back To All

TAGS

GET our HELP