Gomez-Perez v. Potter, 553 U.S. 474 (2008)
Primary Holding
A federal employee who experiences retaliation for filing a complaint of age discrimination may assert a claim under the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA).
In the case of Gomez-Perez v. Potter, a postal worker named Myrna Gomez-Perez faced retaliation after she complained about age discrimination at her job. The Supreme Court ruled that federal employees can take legal action if they experience retaliation for reporting age discrimination, which is important because it gives workers the right to speak up without fear of punishment. This case is relevant for any federal employee who feels they have been treated unfairly after filing a complaint about age discrimination, as it helps protect their rights.
AI-generated plain-language summary to help you understand this case
In Gomez-Perez v. Potter, Myrna Gómez-Pérez, a 45-year-old window distribution clerk for the United States Postal Service (USPS), sought a transfer from the Dorado Post Office in Puerto Rico to the Moca Post Office to care for her ill mother. After her transfer was approved in November 2002, she later requested to return to her original position, but her supervisor denied her request, converted the Dorado position to part-time, and filled it with another employee. Following an unsuccessful union grievance regarding her transfer, Gómez-Pérez filed a complaint with the Postal Service's equal employment opportunity office, alleging age discrimination. Subsequently, she claimed to have faced retaliation from her supervisor, including groundless complaints against her, being falsely accused of sexual harassment, and receiving threats from co-workers. Gómez-Pérez initiated a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, asserting that her supervisor's actions constituted retaliation in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The respondent, John E. Potter, Postmaster General, moved for summary judgment, arguing that the ADEA did not allow for retaliation claims and that the United States had not waived sovereign immunity for such claims. The District Court ruled in favor of the respondent, granting summary judgment based on the grounds of sovereign immunity. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit acknowledged that the Postal Reorganization Act waived the Postal Service's sovereign immunity but upheld the District Court's ruling, concluding that the ADEA's federal-sector provision did not extend to retaliation claims. This decision created a split among the Courts of Appeals, prompting the Supreme Court to grant certiorari to resolve the issue.
Whether a federal employee who is a victim of retaliation due to the filing of a complaint of age discrimination may assert a claim under the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA).
The judgment is reversed.
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Decision Date
- February 19, 2008
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Case Type
- landmark
- Majority Author
- Alito
- Damages Awarded
- N/A
- Data Quality
- high
Smith v. City of Jackson, 544 U.S. 228 (2005)
Consumer LostThe Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) allows for recovery under a "disparate-impact" theory of discrimination, similar to that established in Griggs v. Duke Power Co., but the plaintiffs must still demonstrate a valid disparate-impact claim to succeed.
Federal Express Corp. v. Holowecki, 552 U.S. 389 (2008)
Consumer WonA charge alleging unlawful age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) is valid if it is sufficiently clear to put the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on notice of the alleged violation, regardless of whether it strictly adheres to the formal requirements outlined in the agency's regulations.
Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, 554 U.S. 84 (2008)
Consumer WonAn employer defending against a disparate-impact claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act must not only produce evidence supporting its defense based on reasonable factors other than age but must also persuade the factfinder of the merit of that defense.
Dolan v. Postal Service, 546 U.S. 481 (2006)
Consumer WonThe Supreme Court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) waives sovereign immunity for the United States Postal Service in cases of negligence, allowing claims to proceed even when certain exceptions might apply, thus permitting Barbara Dolan's suit against the Postal Service to move forward.