Cheryl Kackos-Stephens, Complainant,v.Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General, Department of Justice (Federal Bureau of Investigation), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMar 27, 2013
0120130325 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 27, 2013)

0120130325

03-27-2013

Cheryl Kackos-Stephens, Complainant, v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General, Department of Justice (Federal Bureau of Investigation), Agency.


Cheryl Kackos-Stephens,

Complainant,

v.

Eric H. Holder, Jr.,

Attorney General,

Department of Justice

(Federal Bureau of Investigation),

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120130325

Agency No. FBI201200163

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the Agency's decision dated September 26, 2012, dismissing her complaint of unlawful employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.

BACKGROUND

At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as an Intelligence Analyst at the Agency's Newark Division facility in Newark, New Jersey.

On June 7, 2012, Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint alleging that the Agency subjected her to discrimination on the basis of reprisal for prior protected EEO activity1 when:

(1) on March 1, 2012 a Supervisory Intelligence Analyst (SIA) made comments during a meeting to a new Intelligence Analyst (IA);

(2) her title was changed from Intelligence Analyst to Intelligence Analyst-Legacy which she asserts has negative connotations;

(3) on April 4, 2012, the SIA sent an email to Complainant and another employee telling them not to perform a specific task without contacting a specific individual;

(4) Complainant was selected to attend a training meeting at the FBI headquarters;

(5) on April 16, 2012, SIA sent an email stating that another IA had been selected to work a higher priority program and proposed having a farewell lunch for the IA; and

(6) on April 4, 2012, an SIA told his embedded IAs, including Complainant, that they were to schedule monthly meetings with their assigned squads for which they were to pick topics to discuss, take attendance, and report the names of employees who did not attend the meetings.

The Agency dismissed the complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) for failure to state a claim. The instant appeal followed.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Under the regulations set forth at 29 C.F.R. Part 1614, an agency shall accept a complaint from an aggrieved employee or applicant for employment who believes that he or she has been discriminated against by that agency because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age or disabling condition. 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.103, .106(a). The Commission's federal sector case precedent has long defined an "aggrieved employee" as one who suffers a present harm or loss with respect to a term, condition, or privilege of employment for which there is a remedy. Diaz v. Dep't of the Air Force, EEOC Request No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994). If Complainant cannot establish that she is aggrieved, the Agency shall dismiss a complaint for failure to state a claim. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1).

The Commission has held that where, as here, a complaint does not challenge an agency action or inaction regarding a specific term, condition, or privilege of employment, the claim of harassment may survive if it alleges conduct that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the complainant's employment. See Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 23 (1993). With a claim of reprisal, the Commission has stated that adverse actions need not qualify as "ultimate employment actions" or materially affect the terms and conditions of employment to constitute retaliation. Lindsey v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Request No. 05980410 (Nov. 4, 1999) (citing EEOC Compliance Manual, No. 915.003 (May 20, 1998)). Instead, the statutory retaliation clauses prohibit any adverse treatment that is based upon a retaliatory motive and is reasonably likely to deter the charging party or others from engaging in protected activity. Id.

Even applying the liberal standard for stating a viable claim of retaliatory harassment, we find that Complainant's allegations - which essentially involve an isolated comment and email not directed exclusively to Complainant, a change in title, and two work directives addressed to a group - are not sufficiently severe or pervasive to state a hostile work environment claim. Moreover, even viewed in the light most favorable to Complainant, these events are not reasonably likely to deter Complainant or others from engaging in protected activity.

Accordingly, the Agency's final decision dismissing Complainant's complaint is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0610)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this case if the Complainant or the Agency submits a written request containing arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. The appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law; or

2. The appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, must be filed with the Office of Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision or within twenty (20) calendar days of receipt of another party's timely request for reconsideration. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at 9-18 (November 9, 1999). All requests and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013. In the absence of a legible postmark, the request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604. The request or opposition must also include proof of service on the other party.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation must be submitted with your request for reconsideration. The Commission will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604(c).

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0610)

You have the right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive this decision. If you file a civil action, you must name as the defendant in the complaint the person who is the official Agency head or department head, identifying that person by his or her full name and official title. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your case in court. "Agency" or "department" means the national organization, and not the local office, facility or department in which you work. If you file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0610)

If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot afford the services of an attorney, you may request from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also permit you to file the action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c). The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of the Court. Filing a request for an attorney with the Court does not extend your time in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above ("Right to File a Civil Action").

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

March 27, 2013

__________________

Date

1 In her appeal, Complainant raises age discrimination. However, she did not raise it as a basis in her formal complaint.

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

2

0120130325

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

2

0120130325