In 2012, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) sued the United States Postal Service (USPS) for retaliating against a Safety Specialist at the Seattle, Washington Processing & Distribution Center (P&DC). According to the DOL press release:

 OSHA's investigation determined that the Postal Service followed a pattern of adverse actions against the safety specialist, who was assigned to the Seattle Process and Distribution Center at 10700 27th Ave. S., after learning that he had assisted another employee in exercising her rights under the OSH Act and provided her with OSHA's contact information. That employee later filed a formal complaint with OSHA alleging unhealthful conditions at the facility. The specialist subsequently suffered a series of reprimands, was restricted from contact with staff at the facility and was transferred to an office without the necessary equipment to perform his job. The investigation also substantiated claims that the Postal Service reassigned many of the specialist's duties to an individual with a lower pay grade and did not select him for a promotion because of his interactions with OSHA despite acknowledging him as qualified for the position.

**correction: the date should be On April 21, 2008

 As the DOL pointed out in its filing, USPS was aware documents related to Safety Specialist's’ poor treatment would be the subject of litigation by July 2008. The Safety Specialist’ "EEOC complaints regarding his de facto demotion by USPS had resulted in a litigation hold issued by the EEO investigator instructing Senior Plant Manager to preserve emails related to these actions." But in the course of conducting discovery, the DOL learned that the Postal Service had destroyed all electronic copies of emails between its employees prior to July 1, 2009 held in its national database. DOL claims it is prevented in making its case and seeks sanction against the USPS for Spoliation of Evidence.  The DOL claims the USPS “conscious disregard for its obligation to preserve” information regarding the safety specialist led to a limited, selective email records and personal notes from managers. 

**The USPS Seattle District's Human Resources Manager and selection official for the Manager of Safety position denied to the Safety Specialist in 2009, testified that she kept detailed notes about her supervision of subordinates involved with this case. However, she was never told to keep those notes, and she destroyed them when she retired in 2011.

 In summary, the DOL claims the Spoliation of Evidence goes to a core issue in their case; namely the relationship between the safety specialist’s protected activities and the actions taken against him by the USPS. Without the full range of documents prepared by the USPS agents in dealing with the safety specialist, the DOL assert they are unfairly restricted in developing case-in-chief and impaired in responding to one of the USPS primary defenses. Given the high degree of prejudice suffered by the safety specialist, the DOL motion for an order barring the USPS from presenting evidence or argument that safety specialist performance problems prior to July 1, 2009 motivated its treatment of him is appropriate.