Failed discrimination investigation does not mean you won

The complainant has Diabetes Type II, and asked for reasonable accommodations regarding his inability to do certain life functions. The agency did not investigate properly, and the AJ sent the case back to the agency to follow up with a proper investigation into the disability. This delay does nothing for the complainant, as nothing has been decided. Note, that an EEOC case can take several years to reach a final decision, and that if the AJ is deciding than the complainant has already waiting years from within his agencies final decision first. I hope the complainant is still alive from his condition of high bllod pressure pressure and type 2 diabetes, to be reassigned.

Specifically, the requirement that an agency investigate complaints

of discrimination is codified at 29 C.F.R. § 1614.108. The agency

has a duty to develop an impartial and appropriate factual record upon

which to make findings on the claims raised by the written complaint.

See id.  An appropriate factual record is one that allows a reasonable

fact finder to draw conclusions as to whether discrimination occurred.

See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.108(a).  The investigator is required to conduct

a thorough investigation–identifying and obtaining all relevant

evidence from all sources regardless of how it may affect the outcome.

EEOC Management Directive (MD)-110, p. 6-8 (Nov. 9, 1999).  Therefore,

an investigator must exhaust those sources of information likely to

support the positions of complainant and the agency.  Id.

In particular, in investigating a claim of disability discrimination,

the agency must ensure that the investigator “asks the right questions” of

complainant, ones designed to elicit pertinent evidence on the threshold

issues of: whether complainant has an impairment; whether it affects a

major life activity; and whether it substantially limits a major life

activity.  See Carr, EEOC Appeal No. 01A43665.

Here, for the reasons set forth above, we find that the agency failed to

develop an adequate evidentiary record because it contains insufficient

information upon which to determine whether complainant is substantially

limited in a major life activity because of his diabetes. Accordingly,

we VACATE the agency’s final decision, and we REMAND the complaint back

to the agency to undertake a supplemental investigation as set forth in

the ORDER below.

ORDER

1. Within 45 calendar days of the date that this decision becomes

final, the  agency shall undertake and complete a supplemental

investigation of this complaint, by obtaining affidavits and relevant

documentation on the following as it existed on July 16, 2004, and

September 18, 2004, the dates of the discriminatory incidents at issue:

A. The extent of complainant’s limitations, problems, or restrictions

in the major life activities of eating and caring for oneself that

result from his diabetes.  The information obtained should describe

any dietary restrictions, including whether he must eat on a schedule

and the medical consequences of what he eats, when he eats, and how much

he eats.  The investigation should also include detailed information about

complainant’s  regimen for monitoring his blood sugar.  If complainant

experiences limitations only under certain circumstances, the agency

should find out what those circumstances are and how often they occur.

The agency shall assess all information obtained to determine whether

complainant is substantially limited in the major life activities of

eating or caring for oneself.

B. The extent of complainant’s limitations, problems, or restrictions, if

any, in other major life activities resulting from his diabetes. Examples

of other major life activities include: walking, standing, speaking,

breathing, lifting, seeing, hearing, sleeping, learning, thinking,

concentration, controlling bodily waste, bending, stooping, twisting,

reaching, pushing, pulling, and climbing.  The information obtained

should include any limitations on how long or how much complainant can

accomplish activities and   limitations in the circumstances or

way he can do activities.  This information should include evidence

about any complications, such as neurological or other damage, that

complainant has developed as a result of his diabetes. If complainant

experiences  limitations only under certain circumstances, the agency

should find out what those circumstances are and how often they occur.

The agency shall assess all information        obtained to determine

whether complainant is substantially limited in a major life activity.

C. When making the determinations in A and B above, the agency is

directed to ascertain how complainant’s use of medications (e.g.,

insulin), including any side effects, impacts his limitations, problems,

and restrictions.

2. The agency is directed to ask complainant to produce or provide

access to evidence in support of his contentions regarding his diabetes

and its impact on his major life activities. That evidence may include

documentary evidence, such as doctor’s notes or medical records,

or potential witnesses to contact, such as medical personnel, family

members, friends, or co-workers.

3. The agency shall instruct the investigator to compile the above

information into an investigative report, and transmit it to the agency

within 45 days of the date that this decision becomes final. No later than

50 days of the date that this decision becomes final, the agency will

insure that complainant is in receipt of a copy of the report, and also

provide a copy to the Compliance Officer referenced below. Thereafter,

within 60 days of the date this decision becomes final, the agency shall

issue a new final decision providing complainant with the appropriate

appeal rights. A copy of the new final decision must be provided to the

Compliance Officer as referenced below.