0120131260
10-29-2013
Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Western Area), Agency.
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Western Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120131260
Agency No. 1E801004512
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the Agency's decision dated January 17, 2013, 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 a Mail Processing Clerk at the Agency's GMF facility in Denver, Colorado. She also served as a union steward.
On November 27, 2012, Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency, through the Manager of Distribution Operations ("MDO") subjected her to ongoing discriminatory harassment on the bases of color (white) and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity. Specifically, Complainant alleged that the MDO had her investigated for sexual harassment because another employee allegedly complained that Complainant was staring at her. Moreover, Complainant alleged that her request for union representation during the investigation was denied. Finally, Complainant alleged that on October 31, 2012, within minutes of concluding her REDRESS session during EEO counseling on the instant complaint, all union stewards (including herself) were denied further union release time and ordered to work in automation.1
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
An agency shall accept a complaint from any 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. Department of the Air Force, EEOC Request No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994). When the complainant does not allege he or she is aggrieved within the meaning of the regulations, the agency shall dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1).
As an initial matter, with regard to Complainant's allegations concerning being denied union representation, being questioned about taking union time as a steward, and the October 2012 limitations placed on all union stewards concerning union time, we find that these are fundamentally issues of union rights, not employment discrimination. The Commission has held that an employee cannot use the EEO complaint process to lodge a collateral attack on another proceeding. See Wills v. Dep't of Def., EEOC Request No. 05970596 (July 30, 1998); Kleinman v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Request No. 05940585 (Sept. 22, 1994); Lingad v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Request No. 05930106 (June 25, 1993). The proper forum for Complainant to raise challenges to these union time issues is within the collective bargaining process.
Therefore, the only remaining allegations supporting Complainant's harassment claim concerns the initiation of the sexual harassment investigation. The Commission has held that where a complaint does not challenge an agency action or inaction regarding a specific term, condition, or privilege of employment, the claim may survive as evidence of harassment if it 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). Applying these standards, we find that Complainant has not alleged a viable hostile work environment claim with regard to this isolated event. Complainant has not explained how she was harmed by the investigation, and there is no indication that any adverse action resulted.
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
October 29, 2013
__________________
Date
1 During EEO counseling, Complainant also alleged that in August 2012, the MDO had her immediate supervisor question her about her use of union time.
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
2
0120131260
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0120131260