Issues

Issues or claims are the “acts of harm” you suffered at the hands of your management official(s): termination, suspension, warning, denied accommodation, denied sick leave, denied annual leave, denied promotion, denied bonus, denied hire, harassment, and denied terms and conditions of employment (such as FMLA, OWCP benefits, health insurance, lunch break, etc.).  "Discrimination" or "retaliation" can never be an "issue," “claim,” or an “act of harm,” despite the meaning in normal English.  You cannot be discriminated or retaliated against without the act of harm you suffered.

Identifying the issues is very important, because remedies are usually derived from the “acts of harm.” EEO investigator and EEOC administrative judge will only investigate or adjudicate the accepted issues or claims, nothing else.

If you cannot count as to how many issues/claims are pending, you cannot succeed. You must be able to identify and articulate each and every claim you raise as discriminatory or retaliatory - in a sentence. Otherwise, you will be lost in the proceedings.

Each act of harm must have a verb. For example, “On May 19, 2022 my supervisor rejected my request for sick leave for the period between May 20, 2022 and May 29, 2022.” Here the claim is: denied sick leave. The following is not a good written complaint: “On May 19, 2022 I went to my supervisor’s office and presented my leave form. He rejected it without providing a reason.” Here, my action (I went, I presented) cannot be an act of harm. Only the denial of the request is. In short, do not write a novelette when you write an EEO complaint.

A claim without identifying an issue is not a claim. A claim without identifying a base is not an EEO claim.

See samples of Complaints for purchase in Store.

Bases

Bases are the protected classes identified in the law, such as race (African-American,
Caucasian, Asian), color (white, black, dark brown, light brown, etc.), age (40 or older), sex (male, female, pregnancy, transgender, sexual orientation), national origin (Hispanic, Hispanic ancestry, Mexico, Mexican ancestry, Russia, Russian ancestry, Kenya, Kenyan ancestry, China, Chinese ancestry, India, Indian ancestry, Native American, Native American ancestry, etc.), disability (back injury, asthma, PTSD, depression, familial association with someone with disability, etc.), religion (Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, etc.), and Retaliation (prior EEO activities including reasonable accommodation requests, any protest or complaint against discrimination toward co-workers, or providing a statement or testifying on someone else’s EEO case, etc.).

A claim without identifying an issue is not a discrimination claim. For example, “I was discriminated because I am Asian,” is not a valid claim; because “discrimination” is not an act of harm but a legal conclusion drawn from examination of facts supporting the claim that “I was suspended because I am Asian,” which is a proper claim of discrimination.

Likewise, a claim without a base is not a valid claim. For example, “I was suspended based on false accusations.” Proving accusation to be false is not enough to prove discrimination. You must further prove that you were suspended because of your race, Asian. How do you prove this? By circumstantial evidence, not direct evidence (as no manager nowadays will admit that he suspended you because you are an Asian—this is a case of direct evidence). Circumstantial evidence infers (and does not show directly) discriminatory animus on the part of the responsible management official (RMO), if it shows that the others in similar situations (i.e., a similar chain of command, ranking, job title, duties, and responsibilities, etc.) were more favorably treated than you were by the same manager.

Proving that the stated reasons put forth by the responsible management official (RMO) is a pretext for inflicting the act of harm is relatively easy in comparison to proving that the act of harm (proved to be based on a pretext) was further based on your race. This is more difficult, because this requires a comparative examination of the same manager’s treatment toward the other “similarly situated individuals.” You must examine, for example, how did your supervisor discipline you (Male) and Jane (Female) when both were late to work. Were the disciplinary actions different in severity for the same infraction? If the comparative data show that you were disciplined more severely, that proves indirectly that the supervisor acted based on your sex.

See for more detail on How to Write a Complaint. Samples of EEO Complaints can be purchased in Store.