A Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) compliance examiner has filed a lawsuit alleging race discrimination and retaliation. Thaddeaus Sims claims he was reassigned to more complex work and subjected to heightened scrutiny after engaging in protected equal employment opportunity activity.
The lawsuit highlights potential discriminatory employment practices within a key U.S. financial regulator, raising questions about internal fairness and compliance with civil rights laws.
A Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) compliance examiner has filed a lawsuit alleging race discrimination and retaliation, claiming he was moved to more complex work and faced increased scrutiny after engaging in protected equal employment opportunity activity. Thaddeaus Sims filed the suit on September 18 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against acting director Mark Paoletta.
Sims, who has worked at the CFPB since 2014 and claims a strong performance record, alleges that management subjected him to unfavorable employment actions starting in 2024. The lawsuit centers on a July 2024 reassignment where Sims was allegedly removed from a convenient servicing assignment in Texas and moved to a more complex mortgage origination examination requiring travel and in-person training. He claims a white examiner supervised by the same manager remained on the more convenient assignment.
Further allegations include being assigned responsibilities typically held by higher-grade examiners without a corresponding increase in grade or pay. Sims contends the CFPB's assignment practices had a disproportionate impact on Black employees, as Black workers constituted the majority of affected CN-51 examiners in the Southeast Region. The complaint states that Sims, a Black examiner, challenges race discrimination, a neutral employment practice with a disparate impact on Black examiners, and retaliation.
Sims also alleges he was required to repeat training, faced heightened scrutiny through monthly coaching, received written counseling over a travel card, and had authorized administrative leave questioned. He was also assigned an acting examiner-in-charge role, which he claims involved leadership responsibilities he did not want. These actions allegedly occurred during and after his EEO activity, which began with contacting a counselor on June 3, 2024, and filing a formal complaint on July 5, 2024. An internal agency investigation concluded in September 2025 that no discrimination occurred.
The complaint also references an earlier lawsuit Sims filed in D.C. Superior Court in August 2025, which was dismissed without prejudice in federal court. Sims's request to reopen that case was denied on September 18, 2026, the same day he filed the current lawsuit. Sims is seeking a declaration of Title VII violations, an injunction against further discrimination, expungement of employment records, equitable relief, back pay, lost benefits, compensatory damages, and attorneys' fees.
Pick the topics you care about. Get only what matters, on your cadence.