01991290
12-22-1999
John L. Szeligo, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
John L. Szeligo, )
Complainant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01991290
) Agency No. 4C-442-0253-98
William J. Henderson, )
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency. )
___________________________________ )
DECISION
Upon review, the Commission finds that complainant's complaint was
properly dismissed pursuant to Volume 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656
(1999)(to be codified as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1)).<1> Complainant
alleged that he was discriminated against on the bases of religion
(Alcoholics Anonymous) and sex (male harassment) when:
on July 22, 1998, the Postmaster called him paranoid and stated that he
always thinks everyone is picking on him. Complainant alleged further
that the Postmaster stated that he [Postmaster] was going to spend
more time on the workroom floor to stop complainant's harassment of
other clerks;
on July 24, 1998 the Postmaster stated �John you are taking my name in
vain;� and
on July 31, 1998, the Supervisor of Customer Service told him she would
stop the harassment and contact the agency EEO office. Complainant
alleges that nothing was done.
A review of the file reveals that complainant contends that the agency
actions as described in the instant complaint were taken for the purpose
of harassment. In Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 21
(1993), the Supreme Court reaffirmed the holding of Meritor Savings
Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 67 (1986), that harassment is actionable
if it is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of
the complainant's employment. The Court explained that an "objectively
hostile or abusive work environment" is created when "a reasonable person
would find [it] hostile or abusive: and the complainant subjectively
perceives it as such. Harris, supra at 21-22. A claim of harassment is
actionable only if, allegedly, the harassment to which the complainant
has been subjected was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the
conditions of the complainant's employment. Cobb v. Department of the
Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05970077 (March 13, 1997).
Additionally, the Commission has repeatedly found that claims of a few
isolated incidents of alleged harassment usually are not sufficient to
state a harassment claim. See Phillips v. Department of Veterans Affairs,
EEOC Request No. 05960030 (July 12, 1996); See Cobb, supra. Moreover, the
Commission has repeatedly found that remarks or comments unaccompanied by
a concrete agency action usually are not a direct and personal deprivation
sufficient to render an individual aggrieved for the purposes of Title
VII. See Backo v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05960227 (June
10, 1996); Tarin v. Army, EEOC Request No. 01962829 (January 22, 1997).
A review of the record reflects that when viewed separately, the
incidents addressed in claims 1 - 3 are insufficient to render complainant
aggrieved. Moreover, the matters in question as identified in claims
1 - 3 are insufficient to support a claim of harassment. On appeal, no
persuasive arguments or evidence have been presented regarding whether
complainant has stated a claim, i.e., to show that complainant was injured
by the incidents raised herein. Accordingly, the agency's final decision
dismissing complainant's complaint is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1199)
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
64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter
referred to as 29 C.F.R. �1614.405). 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999)
(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 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 (S1199)
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:
Dec. 22, 1999
_____________________________________
DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director
Office of Federal Operations
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision
was received within five (5) calendar days of mailing. I certify that
the decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative
(if applicable), and the agency on:
DATE Equal Employment Assistant
1On November 9, 1999, revised regulation governing the EEOC's federal
sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations apply to all
Federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in the administrative
process. Consequently, the Commission will apply the revised regulations
found at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the
present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the
Commission's website at WWW.EEOC.GOV.