Retaliation Lawsuits Held Applicable for Federal Employees Under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act: A Victory for Older Federal Workers

• DOI: 10.1177/0734371X08327091
• Published date: 01 March 2009
• Date: 01 March 2009
• Subject Matter: Articles

Review of Public Personnel
Administration
Volume 29 Number 1
March 2009 89-94
© 2009 SAGE Publications
Retaliation Lawsuits Held
10.1177/0734371X08327091
http://roppa.sagepub.com
Applicable for Federal
hosted at
http://online.sagepub.com
Employees Under the Age
Discrimination in Employment Act:
A Victory for Older Federal Workers
The Supreme Court’s Decision in Gomez-Perez v. Potter,
Postmaster General
Charles E. Mitchell
Troy University
In a decision having much to do with what is implied in the Age Discrimination in
Employment Act (ADEA) but not explicitly stated, the Supreme Court ruled that
federal sector employees are not precluded from filing retaliation lawsuits under the
ADEA. Relying on precedent decisions as well as established legislative intent, the
Supreme Court rejected several arguments of the government in what the Court
considered a narrow interpretation of the federal sector provision of the ADEA statute
at §633a. The ruling affirmed that federal sector employees have the same protection
as do private sector employees in all aspects of the ADEA statute.
Keywords:
retaliation; Age Discrimination in Employment Act; discrimination; federal
sector; sovereign immunity
On May 27, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision in Gomez-Perez
v. Potter, Postmaster General (Gomez-Perez, 2008) that allows federal employees
to pursue a course of action in court alleging retaliation under the Age
Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). With Justice Samuel Alito writing for
the majority, the Court ruled that federal sector ADEA plaintiffs have the same rights
as their private sector counterparts in their ability to pursue a course of action alleg-
ing retaliation. The Supreme Court asserted that the Court of Appeals erred in its
rejection of previous decisions of the Court that addressed the issue of retaliation in
analogous contexts. Clarification was imperative, as this issue has significant impli-
cations for a federal sector workforce that is increasingly older in age. Without the
protection of retaliation, an adverse decision would have served as a deterrent to fed-
eral sector complaints filed under the ADEA.
89

---

90
Review of Public Personnel Administration
The Gomez-Perez Case
Myrna Gomez-Perez started working for the United State Postal Service (USPS)
in 1987 in New York. Eight years later, she was transferred to Puerto Rico and worked
as a full-time window distribution clerk at the Dorado Post Office. In October 2002,
at age 45, she was transferred to the Moca Post Office to be closer to her mother, who
was ill. After her transfer, she reduced her work hours and became a part-time
employee. Approximately 1 month later, she submitted a request to return to her for-
mer position at the Dorado Post Office in Puerto Rico. The request was denied and
on the same day, her supervisor converted the vacant position from full-time to part-
time and filled the position with another employee (Gomez-Perez, 2007).
Gomez-Perez filed and was unsuccessful in a grievance and a subsequent EEO
complaint against the USPS alleging discrimination because of her age. She later
filed an action in District Court alleging, among other things, that she was retaliated
against because of her ADEA complaint.
In her ADEA lawsuit, Gomez-Perez alleged that after her EEO complaint, she
was subjected to various forms of retaliation. The harassment included the follow-
ing: Her supervisor called her into meetings during which groundless complaints
were leveled at...