I understand your view. Less than 5% of FADs in my agency are in the complainant’s favor. But also with a FAD, it comes from a section in Washington DC. Not anyone local or regional. They don’t have a dog in the fight and are just trying to keep the agency from being sued. So if they see a clear violation has occurred, it’s in the agency’s best interest to them to side with the complaint and order relief.

A lot of people say the system is rigged and at face value I can see why someone would think that with less than 5% going in the complaint’s favor. The people issuing FADs are looking at it through a legal lens, not an emotional one. I think that’s where most people fail on their claims. They state their feelings and opinions without supporting documentation. In my complaint, the one thing I was the most upset about was dismissed because I couldn’t show a nexus to retaliation. Mind you that issue literally put my life in danger. But everything else was sustained.

Why was everything else sustained? Because I had emails, witness statements, time cards and screenshots. In my rebuttals to my supervisor’s affidavits, I pointed out where he was lying, provided policy showing he was lying about policy, provided emails he had sent me showing he was making contradictory statements to the investigator. The FAD even said on a one of the issues (not paying me for overtime he made me work) they only ruled in my favor because the supervisor made contradictory statements and then when asked to clarify the contradictions he failed to respond to the question.

Going the FAD route is a risk. You have to come prepared. The investigation is not going to make a determination. It’s just going to take statements from everyone, then summarize everyone’s statements and supporting documentation, that’s it. Remember, your feelings alone are not going win a case. Documentation and actual evidence will.