• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • Online Consultation
  • Make a Payment LawPay
  • 757-460-3477

Bonney, Allenberg, O’Reilly, & Eddy, P.C.

Legal Assistance for Federal Employees

  • Home
  • Firm Overview
  • Practice Overview
    • Federal Employee EEO Discrimination
    • Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) Appeals
    • Grievances/Arbitrations
    • OSC Appeals
    • Whistleblower Protection
    • Federal Disability Retirement
    • Security Clearance Revocation
  • Attorney Profiles
    • Neil C. Bonney
    • Charles H. Allenberg
    • Laura A. O’Reilly
    • Allison B. Eddy
    • Cameron A. Bonney Evans
You are here: Home / Federal Employment / Retaliatory Reassignments: Where an employee is involuntarily moved or reassigned because he or she engaged in protected EEO activity, the Agency’s action may be viewed as retaliation.

Jul 07, 2016

Retaliatory Reassignments: Where an employee is involuntarily moved or reassigned because he or she engaged in protected EEO activity, the Agency’s action may be viewed as retaliation.

Many federal government employees who have engaged in the EEO process know all too well that EEO activity may be received negatively by their chain of command. Most federal government employees who engage in the EEO process are also aware that they have the right to file an EEO complaint based on retaliation in the event they feel their management has taken a materially adverse action against them because of their EEO activity. One form of retaliation may be an involuntary reassignment to a different position, schedule, or work location. When reassigning an employee who has engaged in protected EEO activity, managers will often use the rationale that they are reassigning the employee away from whatever co-worker or supervisor was named in the employee’s EEO complaint as a way of “protecting” that employee. In reality, these types of involuntary reassignments may be viewed as punitive in nature, especially where the employee who engaged in EEO activity is moved to a less desirable work location or given less desirable duties.

Even if an Agency claims that a reassignment of an employee is intended to protect the employee rather than retaliate against the employee for having filed an EEO complaint, the involuntarily reassigned employee may have a viable EEO complaint that the reassignment was actually based on retaliation for the employee’s protected EEO activity. In Moore v. Department of Education, EEOC Appeal No. 0120111258 (August 15, 2013), the Complainant was detailed to an undesirable work assignment after filing an EEO complaint alleging, in part, sexual harassment. The Complainant’s third-level supervisor stated that after being informed of the EEO complaint, the Complainant was reassigned to “protect her” in the event her allegations of sexual harassment proved to be true. The EEOC found that detailing Complainant was not appropriate corrective action for the sexual harassment she suffered, explaining “that a complainant should not be involuntarily transferred or otherwise burdened, because such measures could constitute unlawful retaliation.” The EEOC concluded that the Complainant’s transfer in that particular case “was due to retaliation for Complainant’s claims of sexual harassment.”

Similarly, in Abrigo v. Department of Homeland Security, EEOC Appeal No. 0120064230 (September 15, 2008) (which was cited in the Moore decision), the Agency changed the Complainant’s schedule “to protect” her while investigating her sexual harassment claims. Even though the EEOC affirmed a finding of no discrimination as to the sexual harassment claims, the EEOC found that the subsequent schedule change was retaliatory. The EEOC concluded that the Agency failed to articulate a legitimate nondiscriminatory rationale for the schedule change, holding “that the undisputed record supports the finding that the agency engaged in reprisal toward complainant on the basis of her prior protected EEO activity when it changed her schedule.”

If you feel you have been subjected to retaliation for engaging in protected EEO activity and would like to discuss your situation with an attorney, please call the law firm of Bonney, Allenberg, & O’Reilly, P.C. to set up an initial consultation with one of our attorneys.

Categories: Federal Employment, Uncategorized Tags: EEO, Retaliation

sidebar

Blog Sidebar

Categories

  • Federal Employment
  • MSPB
  • Uncategorized

Tags

arbitration Clean Record Collective Bargaining congressional inquiry consultation COVID-19 COVID19 disability disability retirement disciplinary action DoD CAF DoDCAF drug testing EEO EO13836 EO13837 EO13839 EO13950 EO13957 EO14003 Executive Order failure to follow instructions federal employment federal employment law federal employment lawyer federal law FERS FLRA insubordination marijuana MSPB OPM reasonable accommodation religion Retaliation retirement security clearance Settlement suspension Union Unions vaccine VA employee whistleblower disclosure whistleblower retaliation

Footer

Contact Us

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Recent Posts

Disability Retirement Considerations for Federal Employees

Federal employees who find themselves in the unfortunate situation of being medically unable to continue performing the essential functions of their positions may be eligible for a disability retirement through their government retirement system.  Generally speaking, federal employees covered by the Read More

OPM Finalizes Recission of Trump-Era Restrictions on Clean-Record Settlements

The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) recently issued its final regulations rescinding many of former President Trump’s orders impacting federal employees, including the restriction on entering clean-record settlements that had been included in former President Trump’s Executive Order 13839.  Read More

Social Media

FacebookLinkedin

Bonney, Allenberg, O’Reilly, & Eddy, P.C.
4854 Haygood Rd., Suite 200 | Virginia Beach, VA 23455 | 757-460-3477

© 2012-2023 Bonney, Allenberg, O’Reilly, & Eddy, P.C. All Rights Reserved.
Virginia Beach Website Design by CDG.

Professional Affiliations

  • National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA)
  • Virginia State Bar (VSB)
LawPay button
Cleantalk Pixel
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.OkNo