In
Al-Saffy v. Vilsack, (DC Cir., July 1, 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reversed the district court and allowed a religious and national origin discrimination claim against both the Department of Agriculture and the Department of State to proceed. As stated by the court, "Determining whether Al-Saffy’s lawsuit was properly brought requires us to navigate a quagmire of procedural rules."
BNA Daily Labor Report summarizes the court's holding:
Mohamed Tahwid Al-Saffy raised genuine factual issues about whether Agriculture and State were his joint employers when he directed the trade offices in Saudi Arabia and Yemen.... Although Al-Saffy wasn't “officially employed” by the State Department, he reported directly to the ambassadors of Saudi Arabia and Yemen, who are State employees, the court said.....
The court also rejected arguments that Al-Saffy did not file his lawsuit in a timely manner. Again BNA summarizes the court's holding:
An EEOC order that omits that required information can't trigger the 90-day deadline, the court said. Al-Saffy therefore retained the option to sue at any time after 180 days had elapsed from his filing of the original administrative complaint....
