EEOC Question

I have a question and not sure if someone can answer it. My charges have been with the EEOC for about 2.5 yrs now. My employer submitted their response statement last August 2007 and I submitted a rebuttal earlier this year around April.

I contacted the EEOC in July to inquire on the charges and was told that there is a request for information pending from my former employer.

My question is is it common for an employer to be allowed to provide additional information to rebut a response. I was under the impression that once a position statement is submitted its pretty much set in stone.

If my employer lied when they reported their position to the EEOC, I am pretty sure they will lie and withhold information again.

My former employer tampered with my personnel file and withheld evidence (e.g. performance evaluations and a "smoking gun").

Thanks!

wazuri77 wrote:I have a question and not sure if someone can answer it. My charges have been with the EEOC for about 2.5 yrs now. My employer submitted their response statement last August 2007 and I submitted a rebuttal earlier this year around April.

I contacted the EEOC in July to inquire on the charges and was told that there is a request for information pending from my former employer.

My question is is it common for an employer to be allowed to provide additional information to rebut a response. I was under the impression that once a position statement is submitted its pretty much set in stone.

If my employer lied when they reported their position to the EEOC, I am pretty sure they will lie and withhold information again.

My former employer tampered with my personnel file and withheld evidence (e.g. performance evaluations and a "smoking gun").

Thanks!

*PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE*

It is not unusual at all for the investigator to go back to the employer and request additional information. This is certainly true if you raise additional information in your rebuttal to the employer's position statement.

Mr. Pink

Ok thanks.
I guess I all I can do is wait patiently.

I have one more question, one of my charges was retaliation for termination, I subsequently found employment rather quickly but recently was laid off due to the economy.

I understand an employee must find work to mitigate any damages, so i am wondering if this lay off can help my case.

Although my case was strong, attorneys were not interested because I was able to find work. I am barely receiving call backs from potential employees now.

thanks

wazuri77 wrote:Ok thanks.
I guess I all I can do is wait patiently.

I have one more question, one of my charges was retaliation for termination, I subsequently found employment rather quickly but recently was laid off due to the economy.

I understand an employee must find work to mitigate any damages, so i am wondering if this lay off can help my case.

Although my case was strong, attorneys were not interested because I was able to find work. I am barely receiving call backs from potential employees now.

thanks

*PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE*

If your question is whether the lay off will have any impact on your underlying claim of discrimination - no, probably not. If your question is whether the lay off will have an impact on damages - maybe. Certainly, your old employer would argue (if found to have violated the law) that the new job cut off any continuing liability on their part once your started working for the new company. If you were earning less at the new company this would also be a factor in determining damages. This calculation also does not take into account potential compensatory and/or punitive damages. However, that is all down the road - the first step is for a judge to find that the employer violated the law.

You do yourself no benefit of not trying to find new employment. I certainly understand that the job market is not good right now, but I would encourage you to keep at it.

Good luck.

Mr. Pink

Have you contacted a lawyer what state are you in?
JoeC

I am in California.

Not at this moment, I contacted several law firms when I was working and was told that finding a job so quickly wasnt a good thing. I didnt suffer any significant monetary losses, although i was terminated in retaliation for filing the charges. I began working within 2 months. I am debating if I should followup now that I am unemployed.

wazuri77 wrote:I am in California.

Not at this moment, I contacted several law firms when I was working and was told that finding a job so quickly wasnt a good thing. I didnt suffer any significant monetary losses, although i was terminated in retaliation for filing the charges. I began working within 2 months. I am debating if I should followup now that I am unemployed.

Thats not true plaintiff has a responsibility to mitigate damages to the employer so sitting around not looking for work would not be good. Contact an attorney you may be better off opting out of the EEOC and getting a right to sue letter.

My two cents, for what it's worth. As a member of HR (and a representative of the employer), anytime the EEOC has asked me for more information regarding a rebuttal that a former employee has made, IT WAS NOT GOOD FOR THE COMPANY!!!

At this point, you have two options, either continue to wait or request an administrative right to sue. An administrative right to sue means that because the EEOC has taken so long to do their investigation, you are asking to go straight to court.

I just received a call from the EEOC and after this long time (over 2+ years) they were going to issue a "no-cause" determination. I tried not to be argumentative but I am completely floored. My manager and HR clearly retaliated against me. My evaluations went from a "exceeded expectation (4)" to "partially meet (2)". Everything I did there was an issue although I had followed the same procedure/polices for the 3 years I was in the dept. There reasoning was I was placed on a performance improvement plan in 2005 although I provided evidence from HR telling the dept that maintains our files to destroy and remove it from my personnel files.

I was denied a promotion and provided evidence (emails between the the manager and recruiter) where they made it clear that would be having interviews in different locations so that I would not know. The EEOC was like well you didn't have supervisory experience, the person that was hired didn't either (but they are saying he did over 12 years ago). Also, supervisory experience was not a job requirement.

I can go on and on.

I requested a right to sue letter and hopefully I can find an attorney. From my understanding this is common for the EEOC?

It is very common the EEOC is lame only a court process will get the employer's attention. All administrative remedies are limited and the agencies have little interest in pursuing a claim apart from minimal investigation.
JoeC

thanks for the response...hopefully this is resolved in court...

Hello again,
A friend pointed out that there maybe an appeal process but at this point I believe that appealing the decision will be useless, is there ?

thanks

There is and it is useless.
JoeC

Thanks.. I left a message with the investigator and inquired. I also asked if any of the documents I provided was reviewed because obviously they were not.

I found a court case regarding job postings and my former employers argument was that I did not have supervisory experience to be promoted. The experience was not listed as a job requirement but became a requirement after I applied (emails revealed the process my manager and the recruiter developed to not interview me). The position was not reposted with the modified job requirements. The posted job requirements did not match the actual requirements of the position. Of course supervising people is something that is learned on the job.