Laura L. Bernardino, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionFeb 9, 2005
01a50933 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 9, 2005)

01a50933

02-09-2005

Laura L. Bernardino, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Laura L. Bernardino v. United States Postal Service

01A50933

February 9, 2005

.

Laura L. Bernardino,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A50933

Agency No. 1F-941-0056-04

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final

agency decision, dated October 1, 2004, pertaining to 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.; Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation

Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq.; and the Age Discrimination

in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq.

The Commission accepts the appeal in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.

On May 14, 2004, complainant initiated contact with the agency EEO office

claiming that she was subjected to a hostile work environment from �March

19, 2004 and prior.� Informal efforts to resolve complainant's concerns

were unsuccessful. On August 16, 2004, complainant filed the instant

formal complaint based on national origin, age, and disability.

The agency issued a final decision on October 1, 2004, dismissing the

formal complaint on the grounds of untimely EEO Counselor contact.

The agency determined that complainant sought counseling on May 14,

2004 regarding events that occurred on March 19, 2004 and earlier.

Therefore, it concluded that her EEO contact was twelve days beyond the

forty-five day time limit. While complainant characterized the claims

as a continuing violation, the agency noted that complainant failed to

identify a specific act that occurred during the forty-five day time

period preceding her initial EEO contact.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105(a)(1) requires that complaints of

discrimination should be brought to the attention of the Equal Employment

Opportunity Counselor within forty-five (45) days of the date of the

matter alleged to be discriminatory or, in the case of a personnel

action, within forty-five (45) days of the effective date of the action.

The Commission has adopted a "reasonable suspicion" standard (as opposed

to a "supportive facts" standard) to determine when the forty-five (45)

day limitation period is triggered. See Howard v. Department of the Navy,

EEOC Request No. 05970852 (February 11, 1999). Thus, the time limitation

is not triggered until a complainant reasonably suspects discrimination,

but before all the facts that support a charge of discrimination have

become apparent.

EEOC Regulations provide that the agency or the Commission shall extend

the time limits when the individual shows that she was not notified of the

time limits and was not otherwise aware of them, that she did not know

and reasonably should not have known that the discriminatory matter or

personnel action occurred, that despite due diligence she was prevented

by circumstances beyond her control from contacting the Counselor within

the time limits, or for other reasons considered sufficient by the agency

or the Commission.

In the instant case, complainant contends that she has �experienced

ongoing hostility in my working environment ...continuing to March 19,

2004.� While the most recent alleged event occurred on March 19, 2004,

complainant did not contact an EEO Counselor until more than forty-five

days later. Moreover, because there is no alleged discriminatory event

identified within forty-five days of the date of the initial EEO contact,

we determine that a continuing violation analysis is not necessary.

Complainant has failed to present sufficient justification for extending

or tolling the time limit.

Accordingly, the agency's decision to dismiss the complaint on the

grounds of untimely EEO Counselor contact was proper and 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

February 9, 2005

__________________

Date