EEOC finds federal agency did not discriminate on the basis of age disability or reprisal. Complainant filed and Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaint alleging discrimination on the bases of age (49), disability (dermatitis, amputation), and prior EEO activity when she received a rating of 3.0 on her Performance Assessment Communication System (PACS) appraisal and she was held to harsher performance standards than similarly situated employees. Complainant also alleged that the Agency subjected its disabled employees to disparate impact discrimination regarding the PACS, which statistically resulted in their receiving lower ratings. Following the initial investigation, the Agency issued a Final Agency Decision finding that Complainant failed to prove that the Agency subjected her to discrimination as alleged. Complainant appealed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

On appeal the EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations (OFO) found that assuming the Complainant established a prima facie case of discrimination, the Agency articulated legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for its actions, and found that the Agency rated her at the level it felt was accurate. The OFO further held regarding the PACS rating, the evidence showed that disabled employees actually earned better PACS ratings than their non-disabled counterparts and therefore Complainant had failed to establish disparate impact. The OFO affirmed the Agency’s FAD finding no discrimination.

Deena B. v. Social Security Administration, EEOC Appeal No. 2019003226 (September 15, 2020)

Federal employee attorney Kirk J. Angel represents federal employees in EEO claims as well as EEOC and MSPB hearings throughout the nation. You can set a free 15 minute consultation with him right on this website.