Same complainant with two cases, or two different complainants?

Can an eeoc investigator appear as an investigator in one case and be a
mediator in another case?

A friend asked me this question. I'm not sure how to answer it. Can anyone help me out.
Thanks
.

Unavailability of Witnesses Under 29 CFR 1613.218(f), if the agency was ordered to produce a witness who was unavailable on the hearing date, the agency was required to immediately advise the administrative judge, in writing. If the judge found the explanation given was inadequate, the witness would be ordered to attend. If the explanation was adequate, the judge was required to place the explanation into the hearing record and make alternate arrangements to secure the testimony of the witness. Part 1614 contains no counterpart provision. However, the administrative judge retains the authority to make alternate arrangements for taking the testimony of a witness who, for good cause, is unavailable. Such authority would normally be encompassed within the power of the administrative judge to regulate the conduct of the hearing. 29 CFR 1614.109(e). Likewise, the administrative judge retains the authority to order the production of any relevant witness who does not have a good excuse for failing to appear at the hearing. What constitutes a good excuse for failure to appear at the hearing will depend, in part, upon the nature of the witness’ testimony. An EEOC hearing is considered official government business and attendance at the hearing is not lightly excused. But the administrative judge will weigh the excuse with the importance of the testimony. The more important the testimony, the more substantial the reason to excuse attendance at the hearing must be. The administrative judge also has the option of rescheduling the hearing. This is not an option that is favored by administrative judges, or the Commission itself. The administrative judge does not err in refusing to postpone a hearing due to the unavailability of witnesses where the witnesses gave affidavits during the investigation and submitted other documentary evidence and the AJ also fully credits the affidavits of those witnesses. Cruz v. Postmaster General, 01891512, 2327/B5 (1989). The appellant failed to make any showing that the live testimony of the witnesses would have significantly differed from their written testimony.

Another alternative sometimes exercised by the judge is to proceed with the hearing as scheduled and to make arrangements to take the testimony of the absent witness at a later date. Depending on the nature of the testimony and how critical the witness is to the case, the later testimony may be taken by telephone instead of physically reconvening the hearing.
.

Mental duress alone is not a sufficient basis for waiving or tolling the time period. The appellant must show that the mental duress affected his physical or mental ability to file a timely complaint. See Southerland–Jackson v. Secretary of Navy, 01983434 (1999) (employee was in hospital with brain tumor and unable to communicate); Eck v. USPS, 01840503, 1203/C8 (1985). Preoccupation with a serious medical condition is not sufficient grounds for waiving the time limit where several months elapse between the discovery of the alleged discriminatory treatment and contact of a counselor. See Thompson v. USPS, 01831777, 1076/C11 (1983).
.

Do a search for discovery here.
http://archive.eeoc.gov/federal/ajhandbook.html
.

I appreciate being adopted by my Postal Brothers and Sisters on this Board. What I share is usually something that has been shared with me and info that is in my own archives, I just cutting, pasting and passing it on.
 
Now check out this site, it has a wealth of information and cases on it.

EEO: Disparate Treatment
http://www.hr-guide.com/data/G701.htm

Happy Thanksgiving to all.

EAD/m6380
Send your discovery requests directly to the agency attorney. It is their responsibility to contact the individuals that are supposed to provide responses to your questions.

To All,
I too want to express my appreciation to all the contributors to this discussion forum. A special thanks goes to Slingshot for providing everyone with the kind of EEO case law that is helpful in winning cases. Like BigMike I frequently copy and paste her posts into my trial book (which is a self created reference book devoted to EEO cases).

In one of her more demure, seemingly innocuous posts below at 6377 she quoted Hicks regarding the employer’s burden is one of production, not of persuasion. That has huge implications in EEO cases where the employer claims that they acted the way they did, or made the decision they made based on “needs of the service”. Too often judges, and even the complainant, will accept this excuse without challenge. Always challenge the agency’s contention that they are acting on “needs of the service”. Make them produce any documentation to objectively support their claim. Ask the responding management official to describe with specificity what those “needs of the service” were; produce the supporting documentation, and ask whether there was an alternative action that they could have taken to accomplish the same goal. Don’t let management get away with making broad unsupported claims without making them prove it.

Contacting Person Logically Connected to the EEO Process Made Complaint Timely. Complainant attempted to contact the agency with regard to his claim of age discrimination. Complainant resubmitted the letter after it was returned by the Postal Service and ultimately contacted the Manager of the agency's Regional Civil Rights Office, explaining his attempts to file a complaint and his attempt to receive EEO counseling. The Commission noted that an individual must contact an official logically connected to the EEO process, which complainant did when he wrote to the Manager who was the individual the agency stated was responsible for assigning a Counselor. Accordingly, the Commission found that the agency improperly dismissed the complaint for failure to timely contact an EEO Counselor. Grauff v. Department of Transportation, EEOC Appeal No. 01A42718 (September 8, 2004.

They sent me a letter about me using Discovery. Do I send my questions to the Agency itself, the many MDOs I want to ask or both?
> Fast reply would be appreciate.
> Thank you very much.

They sent me a letter about me using Discovery. Do I send my questions to the Agency itself, the people I want to ask or both?
> Fast reply would be appreciate.
> Thank you very much.

/m6376
Anon
Remember to document procedural errors by the judge.
.

Employer's burden of production: In order to rebut the inference of discrimination, the employer must articulate, through admissible evidence, a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for its actions. The employer's burden is one of production, not persuasion; the ultimate burden of persuasion always remains with the plaintiff. Hicks, 509 U.S. at 511.
.

Good Luck!! I had meeting today with judge and lawyers. It is definately trying on the emotions. It feels like just HAVING the meeting and listening to offers is like discrimination all over again. It sucks.

/m6373

I just learned just a hours ago that a good friend of mine has a video camera, I think she called something else, but she said she can tape up to about 2-3 hours uninterupted. She said that she can zoom in on each individual document with exceptional precision and she even has a recorder for me to wear. I knew we always called her "Gadget Girl", but it was not until today that I found out just how Gagettity she is. LOL, she even has some kind of ball point pen with a camera in it. I told her that I don't care if the atty knows that I am recording the event. Unless there is something else, I am ready to ROOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLL UM and let the Scanning begin.....
.

/m6363
Anon,
I have this gut feeling that the atty is going to create a scenerio to keep from giving it to me.
.

Slingshot
O..la..la, we all can't wait to hear what is missing or what is found in the file!! You won't be able to change what they will be, or what they won't be, bringing in the file. When you tell us what it is, we will all be here, ready to brainstorm some more. No worries!!