0120102806
09-24-2010
Christina L. Maskill, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Great Lakes Area), Agency.
Christina L. Maskill,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
(Great Lakes Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120102806
Agency No. 4J-480-0024-10
DECISION
Complainant filed an appeal with this Commission from the Agency's decision dated May 19, 2010, 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. For the following reasons, the Commission AFFIRMS the Agency's final decision.
BACKGROUND
Complainant filed a complaint dated April 29, 2010, alleging that the Agency subjected her to discrimination on the bases of sex (female), color (white), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when: since December 18, 2009, and ongoing, Complainant has been subjected to discriminatory harassment.
The Agency noted Complainant listed three incidents of harassment on her complaint: (1) on December 18, 2009, after a phone conference with an EEO judge, the Union President advised Complainant to go home because she was not in an condition to go out and deliver mail. Supervisor 1 (S1) was insensitive, demeaning, and harsh in words telling Complainant how she should feel and what she should do and was trying to manipulate Complainant into feeling bad about leaving. S1 subsequently demanded Complainant provide medical documentation for leaving early and Complainant told him "no problem." The Agency described incident (2): on January 14, 2010, S1 gave Complainant a hard time when she handed in a leave slip for a doctor's appointment. S1 told Complainant that she did not put the right code on the slip and would be considered to have failed to follow instructions. S1 told Complainant that she worked for him and not the Union when she told him she would wait until the following day and give the form to the Union representative and have her hand it to him. The Agency described incident (3): on January 14, 2010, Station Manager A gave a service talk on sexual harassment at the Annex Office and responded "no" when a co-worker asked if there was a problem at the Annex Office. However, when Station Manager A gave the same service talk the following day at the Main Office, he said "yes," there was a problem at the Annex Office.
The Agency found that the incidents of harassment were not sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute harassment. Moreover, the Agency found the incidents identified were not reasonable likely to deter Complainant or others from engaging in protected activity. With regard to incident (1), the Agency noted that there is no evidence that Complainant suffered any harm as a result of this incident. With regard to incident (2), the Agency noted there is no evidence Complainant was denied the requested leave. With regard to incident (3), the Agency noted there is no evidence Complainant was identified as the source of the problem at the service talk. The Agency dismissed Complainant's complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 11614.107(a)(1), for failure to state a claim.
Complainant subsequently filed an appeal following her receipt of the Agency's final decision. On appeal, Complainant states that management's actions have caused her harm and strain to her marriage.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
At the outset, we note Complainant does not challenge the incidents of harassment defined in the Agency's decision. Upon review, we find the Agency properly dismissed Complainant's complaint for failure to state a claim. Specifically, we find that the three incidents of harassment were not sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute a hostile work environment. Moreover, we find Complainant has failed to show that she suffered a harm or loss to a term, condition, or privilege of employment for which there is a remedy. We note Complainant does not allege that she was denied leave with regard to either incident (1) or (2). With regard to issue (3), Complainant does not dispute the Agency's assertion that the Station Manager did not name her as a problem during the service talk. Furthermore, we find the incidents alleged were not reasonably likely to deter Complainant or others from engaging in protected activity.
CONCLUSION
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
September 24, 2010
__________________
Date
2
0120102806
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
4
0120102806