From Tyree B. v. Raimondo, decided by the EEOC on Oct. 18 but just posted to Westlaw last week:
The Agency framed Complainant's claims [of, among other things, race discrimination based on his being white] as follows:
- Agency officials have ignored, dismissed, disregarded, suppressed, mischaracterized, and mislabeled Complainant's communications and concerns raised about Diversity, Equity and Inclusion since February 2021 and that he has been ostracized as a result. Examples include the following:
- Various Agency officials refuse to engage him on the topic of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion;
- The questions he has posed in Townhall meetings have been disregarded and/or not asked via the Moderator; and,
- On September 22, 2022, he read a NIST Forum open letter posted by another NIST Staff Member on or about March 3, 2021, which referred to a post of his made on the NIST Forums as "racist." Further, his post was labeled as "harassing." NIST has also removed his September 14, 2022 NIST Forum post, as well as other posts, and has unfairly characterized them as "harassing."
- The Department of Commerce initiated "heat" against him for comments he made about Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, which resulted in the initiation, and then continuation of this process.
- NIST and the Department of Commerce celebrate or otherwise favor people in their programs and events due to certain characteristics but no other groups, such as "whites and men." …
[F]or allegations of reprisal, the Commission has stated that adverse actions need not qualify as "ultimate employment actions" or materially affect the terms and conditions of employment to constitute retaliation…. The statutory anti-retaliation provisions prohibit any adverse treatment that is based on a retaliatory motive and is reasonably likely to deter a reasonable employee from engaging in protected activity.