Employees with disabilities allege bias at SSA

[Guest guest]

Employees with disabilities allege bias at SSA

By Tim Kauffman

http://www.federaltimes.com/index.php?S=3670485

Barbara Penny, a former supervisor at the Social Security

Administration, says employees with disabilities at the agency are

passed over for training and are viewed as a costly burden because

they often require special accommodations, such as interpreters or

electronic readers. As a result, they aren't promoted as often as

other employees.

In at least one instance, Penny, who lives in Auburn, Wash., said she

and other members of a panel charged with reviewing top candidates

for a job opening at the agency were provided details on each

candidate's race, gender and disabilities — factors that shouldn't be

considered in personnel decisions. The list was shredded after the

selection panel made its decision, she said.

" There is no doubt in my mind that disability was a factor in

decision-making because it was more convenient for SSA not to pick

the disabled person who needed an expensive accommodation, " she said.

Penny's account is laid out in a new discrimination complaint that

charges Social Security with systemic discrimination against

employees with disabilities. More than 40 current and former

employees who say they were denied promotions at the agency have

provided statements in support of the complaint, which was filed June

27 before the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

The complaint seeks class-action certification to cover current and

former employees with severe disabilities who were denied equal

promotional opportunities since August 2003.

Social Security is doing a better job than most agencies at hiring

disabled employees. There are 1,284 employees with severe

disabilities at the agency, or 2 percent of the agency's total work

force. The govermentwide figure is less than 1 percent.

But Jameel Muhammad, an employee who uses a wheelchair and is a

member of the proposed class, said that's where Social Security's

positive story ends.

" The problem is not getting in the door. The problem is what happens

when you get here, " Muhammad said.

About 57 percent of the agency's disabled employees work at or below

GS-8, and none hold upper-management positions, according to the

lawsuit. What's more, the number and percentage of employees with

severe disabilities at the agency has decreased steadily since 2000.

The case of Jantz is typical of how employees at the agency

have been treated, the lawsuit claims. Jantz, who is deaf, was hired

by Social Security in 1988 as a fiscal management analyst. He has

remained at the same GS-12 pay level for 20 years.

Jantz estimates he has applied and made the best-qualified list for

at least 30 vacant GS-13 positions but has been passed over time and

time again for nondisabled employees who he claims were less

qualified.

Social Security has known for decades that its disabled employees

aren't treated equally, the lawsuit claims. A 1991 study by an agency

working group found that employees with severe disabilities received

fewer promotions, fewer awards and less training than their

nondisabled colleagues and were subject to significantly more

disciplinary actions.

Muhammad said he had to fight with agency leaders to provide

dedicated bathrooms for disabled employees and is embroiled in a

separate fight over failing to provide handicapped parking.

Muhammad got so frustrated that he left the job he was hired for in

2003, as a benefits technical examiner, and became a union official

representing disabled employees at the agency.