Employment Litigation · Primary-source case analysis

Gomez-Perez: Federal Employees May Bring ADEA Retaliation Claims

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published September 13, 2026

Gomez-Perez v. Potter reads the federal-sector command that personnel actions be free from age discrimination to include retaliation for opposing that discrimination.

The postal worker alleged retaliation after an administrative complaint

Myra Gomez-Perez claimed that supervisors reduced her hours, denied transfer requests, and harassed her after she filed an administrative age-discrimination complaint. Lower courts held that the federal-sector ADEA language did not cover retaliation.

Retaliation is a form of discrimination

Drawing on earlier civil-rights decisions, the Court concluded that a prohibition on discrimination based on a protected trait can encompass retaliation against a person who complains about that discrimination even when the text does not separately use the word retaliation.

The federal-sector provision controlled

Section 633a(a) requires federal personnel actions affecting workers age forty or older to be free from discrimination based on age. Its wording and remedial context supported a retaliation cause of action, notwithstanding differences from the private-sector ADEA provision.

The merits remained for remand

The Court reversed the categorical dismissal but did not determine whether retaliation occurred or whether each challenged action was materially adverse and causally connected. Those issues remained for the lower courts.

Key takeaways

• Protect federal employees who oppose age discrimination.
• Preserve the timing between protected complaints and personnel actions.
• Analyze adverse action and causation separately from statutory coverage.
• Do not import private-sector wording mechanically into section 633a.