Social Security may owe thousands of employees more back pay
- By Kedar Pavgi
- January 9, 2013
- Comments
Bragin Alexey/Shutterstock.com
The Social Security Administration may be forced to fund millions of dollars in additional back pay to black male employees who say the agency breached the terms of a 2002 class action discrimination settlement, according to the Federal Times.
In a ruling issued on Dec. 18, Carlton Hadden, the director of the Office of Federal Operations at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ordered an administrative judge to oversee distribution of back pay to black males working at SSA’s office in Baltimore from April 1, 2003, through Sept. 30, 2005. Hadden said that the agency must “correct any misapplications of its policies for granting performance awards,” and instructed the agency to provide written notification to a compliance officer.
The decision confirmed a ruling from April 2011, which found that SSA had broken the terms of the 2002 settlement of allegations that the agency discriminated against the men regarding promotions, performance assessments and bonuses. Though SSA had paid out $6.4 million as part of the agreement, discrepancies remained in the way that bonuses and quality step increases were distributed, the 2011 ruling found.
In a statement, Michael Kator, the employees’ lawyer, said that the ruling would mean that SSA would be forced to pay a steeper penalty than if they had followed the terms of the original settlement. As many as 2,200 current and former employees would likely be affected, according to the settlement documents.
“While it may ultimately be for the experts to decide, SSA’s liability could well exceed by 10 times the amount of the original settlement,” Kator wrote.
Kia Anderson, a spokeswoman for the Social Security Administration, told the Federal Times that the agency “disagreed with the ruling” and would “defend its position” to the administrative judge, who will determine the final sum the agency owes the employees.
(Image via Bragin Alexey/Shutterstock.com)
By using this service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec.com does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
Older Feds Aren't Playing to Their Strengths
Is It Too Hard to Fire Misbehaving Feds?
Americans Still Like the Postal Service
A Forced 4-Day Weekend for Many Feds
No More Tax-Cheating Feds, Senators Say
Video: The Daily Show on Apple's Taxes
Sponsored
3 Ways Data is Improving DoD Performance
Research Report: Powering Continuous Monitoring Through Big Data
Need to Know Memo: Big Data
Cutting costs: Inside the effort to improve the efficiency of federal operations
