NIH security force faced national-origin bias, EEOC claims

Listen to this article

The National Institutes of Health’s security firm systematically harassed and discriminated against employees born in Africa, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleged in a lawsuit filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt.

Since 2013, MVM Inc. has subjected African-born employees to termination without cause, heightened scrutiny, intimidation, suspension and trumped-up charges of misconduct and poor performance at Bethesda-based NIH, EEOC said in its complaint. The Ashburn, Virginia-based company also denied leave to these employees and forced them to work on their scheduled days off, the EEOC claimed.

In addition, African-born employees who complained of the mistreatment were fired, suspended, assigned to undesirable posts, had their hours reduced or were falsely accused of misconduct, the commission alleged.

The agency also claimed a supervisor had complained of “too many Africans,” mocked their accents and said he would reduce their number through termination and refusing to hire more. Of the approximately 400 MVM security personnel at NIH, about 200 were of African birth, the EEOC stated in its lawsuit alleging the company violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibits job discrimination based on national origin.

MVM denied the allegations in a statement Wednesday.

“As a minority-founded, owned, and operated business, MVM is proud of our long record of recruiting and hiring employees from diverse backgrounds,” the Hispanic-owned company stated. “In fact, nearly 80 percent of MVM employees self-identify as an ethnic minority. We do not tolerate discrimination of any type and take all allegations of discrimination very seriously.”

The EEOC seeks back pay and compensatory and punitive damages for harmed employees, as well as a court order for relief designed to prevent future discrimination.

Kevin Berry, director of EEOC’s Philadelphia district office, said in a statement announcing the lawsuit that “it is mind-boggling that an employer would mistreat hundreds of workers – about half of its security workforce – simply because they were from Africa, after the company had hired them in the first place. It’s outrageous situations like this that strongly call for the EEOC to step in and take action to protect people from such vile harassment and retaliation.”

EEOC regional attorney Debra M. Lawrence added in the statement that “it is shocking when managers and supervisors make or condone blatantly derogatory comments based just on national origin. It is inexcusable when an employer retaliates against those who complain about such awful conduct.”

But MVM stated it has “demonstrated to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that no difference exists between our hiring and termination of employees of African and non-African origin.”

“Despite multiple investigations into the allegations of discrimination made in this case, we found no evidence to support these claims,” the company added. “The results of our investigations were further supported by an independent arbitrator, who had previously ruled in regards to the discharge of one of the complainants included in this case. The arbitrator concluded that based on the evidence presented during the arbitration, the termination in said case was done for just cause.”

The EEOC’s lawsuit has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Roger W. Titus and is docketed at the court as EEOC v. MVM Inc., 8:17-cv-02864-RWT.