r/FEDERALEEOC

I’m besides myself! I have a disability discrimination, retaliation, hostile work environment case. Disability is partly tied into permanent damage caused by unmanned robot(2-ton forklift) I was on work comp for 1.5 years and transferred into new position while still out.

Upon my return to work I explained concern for time away to deal with said injury. First major issue by management separate of eeo case is they failed to give me instruction on coding absences according to said injuries.

This leads into my eeo where I submitted not once but total of at least 6 times in 9 months reasonable accommodation requests, finally had a meeting with committee where it was more of a butch fest in policies and sad reminder. All that was brought up was equipment serial numbers to be sent for approval on equipment I can’t use due to restrictions in medical. Hope that makes sense. Either way none of it was helpful or make sense. I was told I would have answer in 2 weeks, still waiting to this day

This leads me into the unlawful part. 2 months prior I was told that because of needing so many breaks for one of medical issues, which is what I needed equipment for to help, I was to log off computer and out of system everytime. I didn’t have to do this before and found out in discipline from it that my local union rep who holds same job doesn’t require the same just as me before. Violation 1

Violation 2: due to major health and financial issues part of my accommodation was no onsite presence but because I hadn’t been paid due to standard policy rules, I was forced to come in. Being told my account was active and all I had to do was to come in. Here is where the violation happened. I found out from on site manager that others were allowed access with NO onsite presence yet I was denied even when I came on site.

Retaliation: while I was on site I sent email to point this out and ask for assistance. What I got back was shocking… I was told “I caused this”

More retaliation: in subsequent emails I asked for assistance, explained that I have medical specifically stating onsite would pose health risk, and that due to the extreme delay I am now out permanently until they can provide a reasonable alternative etc.

More violations: I have had warnings, suspensions, and threats all after protected activity

That said: after filing a very long affidavit, opening a new recurrence claim through Owcp, and grievances still pending. I decided I’m ok with walking away and my doctor immediately agreed and wrote total disability letter. I submitted to all and filed. When I submitted my new note confirming what was already stated to hr. I briefly stated my position and the facts that led to my decision and put them on notice in the nicest way possible. This has been going on throuout my career and I have documentation going back to 2021. Yesterday, 1 day after said email I get a notice for conduct interview. Retaliation anyone? And with all my pending processes going on. I am baffled, worried about my well being, and concerned about my benefits. I have been in a no pay status since beginning of June. Is it wrong of me to write back that I will not participate due to issues at hand but I will answer and cooperate by a written statement. Everything in these interviews is verbally stated and I want written record plus I don’t want to get emotional or say something that can be twisted which is what they have done in every one I get.

I can’t pay a lawyer, I can’t even pay for things I need right now. Was hoping and had faith in these processes. Anyone have some hope?

Engaging Pines & Associates was the most damaging legal decision I have made. This firm received a court sanction and an adverse inference order, throwing out a massive scope of our core evidence. To compound the negligence, counsel billed me for the hours spent drafting defensive responses to cover up their administrative blunders. Save yourself the financial drain and heartache--look elsewhere.

1. Rushed Paid Consultation
   On 03/08/2024, I paid $500 for an intake consultation. From minute one, counsel rushed off the phone and repeatedly cut me off. Despite paying for a full hour, the session was abruptly ended at 48 minutes without addressing core concerns.
2. Breach of Confidentiality
   On 03/28/2024, I provided strategic documentation linking key evidence (timelines, indexes, strong points). I explicitly instructed assigned attorney Amanda Moreno that these materials were strictly "attorney eyes only" for internal strategy. In direct violation, she disclosed them to the opposing federal agency during discovery, exposing our strategy and compromising my position.
3. Substandard Work Product
   Submissions were sloppy, riddled with misspellings, and contained egregious errors--including misidentifying me as female when I am male. Although the firm promised to share draft documents for feedback, they consistently filed pleadings without my review, omitting critical facts I had repeatedly explained.
4. Court Sanctions & Loss of Evidence
   Due to repeated failures to adhere to deadlines, the Administrative Judge issued an official sanction on 01/16/2025 citing three procedural violations, including failing to organize discovery and ghosting a court-ordered deadline following a power outage.
   Taking no remedial action, the judge issued an Order Taking an Adverse Inference after emergency extensions expired. The judge designated core evidence--Interrogatories 6-26/29, RFPs 1-10, and RFAs 1-5--as unfavorable to my claims. Rather than pursuing missing discovery from the agency, the firm focused entirely on drafting self-serving letters to excuse their noncompliance, leaving my case defenseless. They then billed me for writing these defensive excuses.
5. Pattern of Ghosting & Misrepresentation
   The firm stood me up for pre-scheduled legal conferences without notice on at least nine occasions: 04/11/2024, 04/15/2024, 04/21/2024, 11/09/2024, 01/25/2025, 01/26/2025, 02/14/2025, 02/24/2025, and 02/28/2025. Each time, I took off work and rearranged family commitments, only to receive excuses about tech, weather, or illness. On one occasion, after counsel claimed she was ill, a paralegal admitted she was attending a wedding.
   Furthermore, counsel committed an explicit misrepresentation to the court: claiming to the judge she spent three hours working with me on discovery, whereas phone logs verify the call lasted just over an hour.
6. Ignored Critical Discovery
   Attorney Amanda Moreno claimed the agency's discovery contained no helpful information. Upon reading the file myself, I discovered critical evidence counsel missed:
   Clear documentation of immediate reprisal (HR notifying management after my initial complaint);
   Four contradictory justifications given by the agency for taking adverse action;
   An LER specialist requesting removal from the case because management lacked proof;
   A third-level manager reaching out to past employers searching for prior wrongdoing where none existed.
   Because counsel failed to review these materials, I had to write a synopsis highlighting these key points myself.
7. High Turnover
   Pines operates with high turnover. During representation, two assigned attorneys (including Moreno) and two paralegals departed the firm. I was forced to spend time bringing new personnel up to speed, destroying case continuity.
8. Hostile Management & Bad-Faith Rescission

When I raised complaints to managing partner Eric Pines, I was redirected to Operations Manager Steven Tu, who acted as an aggressive, dismissive barrier to accountability.

Later, when I tried to terminate representation, the firm begged me to stay based on the merits of my claim and promised extra staffing. I agreed, yet neglect continued until my case was dismissed without a hearing. When I requested a fee refund on 05/15/2026, the firm offered a 50% refund. When I requested to be made whole for their negligence, they retaliated by completely rescinding their 50% offer and declaring the matter closed.
This firm operates as a high-volume legal mill that collects money while providing abysmal representation and leaving clients unprotected.

The judge's adverse inference order completely restricted a massive block of core evidence, specifically locking down:

21 Interrogatories (Interrogatories 6–26 and 29)
10 Requests for Production (RFPs 1–10)
5 Requests for Admissions (RFAs 1–5)

The Verdict: Avoid this firm at all costs. They are highly skilled at online marketing, but completely incompetent at practicing law. They treat vulnerable federal employees as transactional numbers, display zero human courtesy, and their profound administrative laziness actively destroys the cases they are paid to protect.