The DIGEST Of Equal Employment Opportunity Law Volume XXV, No. 2EEOC
I like the Federal EEO Digest because it summarizes the EEOC case law on basis. Below was all that was covered on that issue. I really like the article on the failure to state a claim and why it gets reversed by the EEOC. The little nut shell summary of these concepts is much more my speed, because it gets right to the heart of the issue, right to what is going on The link below will take you.
Selected EEOC Decisions on: Attorney’s Fees, Compensatory Damages, Dismissals, Findings on the Merits (Under the ADEA, Under Rehabilitation Act, Under Multiple Bases, Retaliation, Remedies, Sanctions, Settlement Agreements, Stating a Claim, Summary Judgment, Timeliness, Office of Federal Operation
Failure to State a Claim: An Overview of the Law and Three Issues of Concern
By Joseph M. Kirchgessner
Introduction
The key lessons that may be taken from this article to avoid a reversal from the Commission are threefold. First, all allegations in a claim should be closely examined to avoid fragmentation. In addition, to state a claim of reprisal, a Complainant needs only to show that a reasonable employee would find the action to be materially adverse and be dissuaded from making or supporting a charge of discrimination- an ultimate employment action is not required. Finally, the merits of a complaint should not be considered when dismissing the claim on procedural grounds. Following these guidelines will ensure that more claims are adjudicated in line with recent Commission decisions.
So this was an article about all of the failure to state a claim that the EEOC rejected and why. Some of them seem pretty obvious like, this one:
In Complainant v. Dep’t of Commerce,31 Complainant filed a formal complaint of discrimination on the bases of sexual harassment when, after having sexual relations with a coworker aboard a ship in which she spent a month at a time living with her coworkers, she was subjected to hazing and rumors about her and the coworker due to the coworker providing details to others about their encounter. When she contacted the EEO counselor, she alleged sexual harassment and sexual assault; emotional and physical abuse; and that she was sexually bullied. The Agency dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim, reasoning that many of the events raised occurred off of the ship and during non-work hours, and that Complainant did not inform management about the alleged sexual harassment until the coworker rejected her invitation to a concert. The Commission found that the claim was improperly dismissed. The Commission reasoned that the Agency addressed the merits of the complaint without a proper investigation. The Agency’s argument that Complainant cannot prove sexual harassment because she engaged in voluntary sexual relations and only filed a complaint after the coworker denied her further advances goes to the merits of the complaint, and the Commission found this was irrelevant to the procedural issue of whether the stated a justiciable claim under Title VII. Therefore, the Agency decision was reversed.
Yeah, what were they thinking…and anyway the merits of the case are always tricky when you are dealing with harassment, it should not even been dismissed even if the agency had the ability to dismiss on the merits! I mean if agencies had the ability to say, hey complainant, you haven’t stated a prima facie case, you are dismissed -THIS WAS NOT THAT CASE!
Employment Complaints Are Us 