01a43692
11-29-2004
James D. Halstead, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Western Area), Agency.
James D. Halstead v. United States Postal Service
01A43692
November 29, 2004
.
James D. Halstead,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
(Western Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A43692
Agency No. 4E-970-0048-04
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the agency's
decision dated April 28, 2004, dismissing his complaint of unlawful
employment discrimination. In his complaint, complainant alleged that
he was subjected to discrimination on the basis of reprisal for prior
EEO activity when on February 6, 2004, the Postmaster sent the Union
President a letter requesting the Union President to take action against
complainant. Complainant claims that in the letter the Postmaster,
among other things, �slandered� him in the letter and asked the Union
President to no longer allow complainant to represent letter carriers.
In its final decision the agency dismissed the complaint under 29 C.F.R. �
1614.107(a)(1) for failure to state a claim. Upon examining the facts,
the agency concluded that because no action had been taken against
complainant as a result of the letter, complainant had not suffered an
injury with respect to a term, condition or privilege of employment.
As such, the agency found complainant presented no actionable claim.
Upon review, the Commission finds that the complaint was properly
dismissed. Under the EEOC regulations, 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. See 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.103, 106(a). The Commission's federal
sector case precedent has long found an �aggrieved employee�to be one
who �has suffered direct and personal deprivation at the hands of the
employer.� Gilyard v. Dep't of Energy, Appeal No. 01A01550 (June 9,
2003) (citing Hobson v. Dep't of the Navy, EEOC Request No. 05891133
(Mar. 2, 1990)); see also Diaz v. Dep't of the Air Force, EEOC Request
No. 05931049 (Apr. 21, 1994) (defining 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.)
Complainant fails to present any evidence describing how he was
personally aggrieved by the Postmaster's letter. Allegations of slander
or statements in a letter urging another to take adverse action against
an employee are not enough, particularly when those adverse actions
never come to fruition. The record lacks any indication that complainant
suffered any personal or pecuniary harm, or harm to any term or condition
of his employment. Without some evidence of a present harm or loss, or
evidence sufficient to describe a hostile work environment as to himself,
the Commission finds that complainant fails to state a claim within the
meaning of the above referenced legal standard. See Cobb v. Dep't of
the Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05970077 (Mar. 13, 1997).
In light of the foregoing, the agency's final decision dismissing
complainant's complaint is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0701)
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), 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 19848,
Washington, D.C. 20036. 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 (S0900)
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 (Z1199)
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 that the Court appoint
an attorney to represent you and that the Court 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 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
November 29, 2004
__________________
Date