Donetta M. Weaver, Complainant,v.Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southeast Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMay 18, 2012
0120121219 (E.E.O.C. May. 18, 2012)

0120121219

05-18-2012

Donetta M. Weaver, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southeast Area), Agency.


Donetta M. Weaver,

Complainant,

v.

Patrick R. Donahoe,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service

(Southeast Area),

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120121219

Agency No. 4W-047-0001-11

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the Agency's final decision dated December 8, 2011, dismissing a formal 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

During the period at issue, Complainant worked as a MRC Clerk at the Agency's Mail Recovery Center in Atlanta, Georgia.

On July 20, 2011, Complainant initiated EEO Counselor contact. Informal efforts to resolve her concerns were unsuccessful. On November 3, 2011, Complainant filed a formal complaint claiming she was subjected to discrimination in reprisal for prior protected activity when, on May 4, 2011, at the request of management, the Office of Inspector General questioned Complainant's physician concerning the extent of her disability, while the same did not occur for other employees on limited duty (hereinafter referred to as "allegation 1"). Complainant claims further that Agency officials took this action to harass her in reprisal for her prior protected activity.

Complainant sought additional EEO counseling on November 10, 2011, and her complaint was later amended to add an allegation that she was further subjected to retaliatory harassment when, on September 30, 2011, she was accused of leaving her work area and was later issued a letter of warning on October 19, 2011.1

The Agency dismissed allegation 1 initially raised in the complaint, concerning the questioning of her physician, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(2) on the grounds of untimely EEO Counselor contact. The Agency found that the event at issue occurred on May 4, 2011, but Complainant did not contact an EEO Counselor until July 20, 2011, which it found to be beyond the 45-day time limit set by the regulations. The Agency dismissed the allegation raised in the amendment concerning the accusation that she left her work station and resulting letter of warning, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) for failure to state a claim.

The instant appeal followed.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Upon review, we find that, in issuing its dismissal decision, the Agency improperly fragmented Complainant's claim of ongoing retaliatory harassment, dismissing parts of her claim on various procedural grounds. The Commission has a policy of considering reprisal claims with a broad view of coverage. See Carroll v. Department of the Army, EEOC Request No. 05970939 (April 4, 2000). Under Commission policy, claimed retaliatory actions which can be challenged are not restricted to those which affect a term or condition of employment. Rather, a complainant is protected from any discrimination that is reasonably likely to deter protected activity. See EEOC Compliance Manual Section 8, "Retaliation," No. 915.003 (May 20, 1998), at 8-15; see also Carroll, supra. Under this more liberal standard, when viewing Complainant's allegations together, we find that she has asserted a viable claim of retaliatory harassment which requires further investigation and processing.

The Agency also improperly dismissed allegation 1 on the grounds of untimely EEO Counselor contact. The Commission has held that "[b]ecause the incidents that make up a hostile work environment claim collectively constitute one unlawful employment practice, the entire claim is actionable, as long as at least one incident that is part of the claim occurred within the filing period. This includes incidents that occurred outside the filing period that the [Complainant] knew or should have known were actionable at the time of their occurrence." EEOC Compliance Manual, Section 2, Threshold Issues at 2-75 (revised July 21, 2005) (citing National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101, 117 (2002)). The record reflects that one of the incidents (letter of warning) comprising Complainant harassment claim occurred within the 45-day period preceding her November 11, 2011 counseling request. Because a fair reading of the record reflects that the matters raised constitute part of a single harassment claim, we find that the Agency improperly dismissed allegations 1 on the grounds of untimely EEO Counselor contact.

The Agency's final decision dismissing Complainant's formal complaint for the reasons stated herein is REVERSED. The formal complaint is REMANDED to the Agency for further processing in accordance with the ORDER below.

ORDER (E0610)

The Agency is ordered to process the remanded claim (ongoing retaliatory harassment, including the May and September/October 2011 incidents) in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.108 et seq. The Agency shall acknowledge to the Complainant that it has received the remanded claim within thirty (30) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final. The Agency shall issue to Complainant a copy of the investigative file and also shall notify Complainant of the appropriate rights within one hundred fifty (150) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final, unless the matter is otherwise resolved prior to that time. If the Complainant requests a final decision without a hearing, the Agency shall issue a final decision within sixty (60) days of receipt of Complainant's request.

A copy of the Agency's letter of acknowledgment to Complainant and a copy of the notice that transmits the investigative file and notice of rights must be sent to the Compliance Officer as referenced below.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0610)

Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory. The Agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30) calendar days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013. The Agency's report must contain supporting documentation, and the Agency must send a copy of all submissions to the Complainant. If the Agency does not comply with the Commission's order, the Complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement of the order. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(a). The Complainant also has the right to file a civil action to enforce compliance with the Commission's order prior to or following an administrative petition for enforcement. See 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407, 1614.408, and 29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(g). Alternatively, the Complainant has the right to file a civil action on the underlying complaint in accordance with the paragraph below entitled "Right to File A Civil Action." 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407 and 1614.408. A civil action for enforcement or a civil action on the underlying complaint is subject to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16(c) (1994 & Supp. IV 1999). If the Complainant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409.

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 (R0610)

This is a decision requiring the Agency to continue its administrative processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil action, you have the right to file such action in an appropriate United States District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date that you receive this decision. In the alternative, you may file a civil action after one hundred and eighty (180) calendar days of the date you filed your complaint with the Agency, or filed your appeal with the Commission. 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. 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

May 18, 2012

__________________

Date

1 There is some confusion in the record over the date of the letter of warning and the Agency, in its dismissal decision, has identified it as being issued in October 2009. However, a fair reading of Complainant's "Information for Pre-Complaint Counseling" form indicates that it was issued in October 2011 and Complainant first requested counseling on the matter on November 10, 2011.

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

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

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

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

2

0120121219

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

2

0120121219

6

0120121219