Michael B. Davis, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJul 19, 2006
01A61515 (E.E.O.C. Jul. 19, 2006)

01A61515

07-19-2006

Michael B. Davis, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Michael B. Davis,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A61515

Agency No. 4G760001206

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the agency's

decision dated December 7, 2005, dismissing his 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.

Complainant was employed as a Carrier Technician at an agency facility in

Ft. Worth, Texas. On October 28, 2005, complainant initiated contact with

an EEO Counselor, alleging that he was subjected to discrimination on the

bases of religion (Pastor), disability (disabled veteran), and age (D.O.B.

08/09/55) when: (1) on April 12, 2005, he was placed in off-duty, non-pay

status and (2) he was issued a Notice of Proposed Removal dated August 10,

2005 and Letter of Decision dated September 16, 2005 which effectuated his

removal on September 19, 2005. In a formal complaint filed on December 2,

2005, complainant alleged that the agency discriminated against him based

on religion, disability and age when it accused him of stealing, slandered

his name, and stated that he should be fired.

The agency dismissed Claim 1 for untimely EEO contact. The agency

explained that complainant did not contact a Counselor until 154 days

beyond the time limitation period. Additionally, the agency dismissed

Claim 2 as an abandoned issue. The agency explained that complainant

abandoned issues cited at the counseling stage when he failed to raise them

in the formal complaint.

Regarding Claim 1, where, as here, there is an issue of timeliness, "[a]n

agency always bears the burden of obtaining sufficient information to

support a reasoned determination as to timeliness." Guy, v. Department of

Energy, EEOC Request No. 05930703 (January 4, 1994) (quoting Williams v.

Department of Defense, EEOC Request No. 05920506 (August 25, 1992)).

Moreover, 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105(1) states that an aggrieved person must

initiate contact with a Counselor within 45 days of the date of the matter

alleged to be discriminatory.

The record discloses that complainant was placed on off-duty, non-pay

status on April 12, 2005. The record further reveals that complainant did

not initiate EEO contact regarding this matter until October 28, 2005, 154

days beyond the time limitation period. Therefore, upon review, the

Commission finds that the agency properly dismissed Claim 1 for untimely

EEO contact.

Further, we agree with the agency's decision to dismiss Claim 2 on the

ground that complainant raised the claim with an EEO Counselor in his pre-

complaint, but did not do so in his formal complaint. This Commission has

held that, "a complainant who receives counseling on an allegation, but

does not go forward with a formal complaint on that allegation is deemed to

have abandoned it, and consequently, cannot raise it in another complaint."

See Small v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05980289 (July

16, 1999).

Accordingly, the agency's final decision dismissing Claim 1 for failure to

state a claim and Claim 2 on the ground that the allegation raised was

abandoned 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

July 19, 2006

__________________

Date