Omer P.,1 Complainant,v.William P. Barr, Attorney General, Department of Justice (Federal Bureau of Investigation), Agency.Download PDFEqual Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 4, 20192019003189 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 4, 2019) Copy Citation U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Omer P.,1 Complainant, v. William P. Barr, Attorney General, Department of Justice (Federal Bureau of Investigation), Agency. Appeal No. 2019003189 Agency No. FBI-2018-00333 DECISION Complainant filed a timely appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) from the Agency's decision dated March 4, 2019, 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. and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq. BACKGROUND At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as an Equipment Specialist, GS-9, at the Agency’s San Antonio Field Office in San Antonio, Texas. On July 31, 2018, Complainant initiated EEO contact alleging that the Agency subjected him to disparate treatment and hostile work environment harassment based on disability (Autism Spectrum Disorder) and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when: 1. on October 3, 2016, the Agency reassigned Complainant from automotive mechanic duties to escort duties, 2. on June 13, 2017, it placed Complainant on a Performance Improvement Plan, 1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant’s name when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission’s website. 2019003189 2 3. from August 3, 2017 through June 1, 2018, it failed to approve Complainant’s request for reasonable accommodation, 4. from November 2017 through June 1, 2018, it failed to respond to Complainant’s Performance Annual Report grievance, and 5. on June 1, 2018, it removed Complainant from Agency employment. On September 6, 2018, Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint reiterating his claims of disparate treatment and harassment. In a decision dated March 4, 2019, the Agency dismissed Complainant’s complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(2), for untimely EEO Counselor contact. The instant appeal from Complainant followed. On appeal, Complainant stated that he did not realize the Agency discriminated against him until his attorney and therapist reviewed his removal letter and informed him of such because the Agency failed to provide accommodation for his disability. Complainant also stated that the Agency gave him the wrong rights on his removal letter, which sent him to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) in error.2 ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS As an initial matter, we find that a fair reading of the complaint in this case reveals that Complainant is alleging that the Agency subjected him to ongoing harassment on the bases of disability and reprisal, that resulted in his removal from employment. The allegations in his complaint are proffered as examples of this pattern of harassment. Therefore, incidents (1) through (4) should not be viewed as separate claims, but factual allegations offered in support of this ongoing discriminatory harassment claim. As such, we find the Agency improperly dismissed Complainant’s complaint on the grounds of untimely EEO Counselor contact. The Agency issued Complainant a letter of removal dated June 1, 2018, with appeal rights to the MSPB solely. Complainant filed an MSPB appeal on July 2, 2018. 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-IV.C.1.b (revised July 21, 2005) (citing National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101, 117 (2002)). 2 The record contains a letter of removal dated June 1, 2018, for “Unacceptable level of performance.” The letter provides appeal rights solely to the MSPB. On July 2, 2018, Complainant filed an MSPB appeal, which was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 2019003189 3 In this case, we find the June 1, 2018 removal is within the 45-day time period preceding Complainant's MSPB appeal filed on July 2, 2018. It is clear from the record that the Agency misinformed Complainant of his appeal rights, and that Complainant's EEO Counselor contact may have been delayed as a result of the Agency's misinformation. The Commission has previously held that an agency may not dismiss a complaint based on a complainant's untimeliness, if that untimeliness is caused by the agency's action in misleading or misinforming complainant. See Wilkinson v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05950205 (March 25, 1996); see also Elijah v. Dep’t of the Army, EEOC Request No. 05950632 (March 28, 1996) (if agency officials misled complainant into waiting to initiate EEO counseling, agency must extend time limit for contacting EEO Counselor). CONCLUSION Accordingly, we REVERSE the Agency's final decision dismissing Complainant's harassment claim and claim of discriminatory removal. We REMAND the claims to the Agency for further processing in accordance with this decision and the ORDER below. ORDER (E0618) The Agency is ordered to process the remanded claims in accordance with 29 C.F.R. § 1614.108 et seq. The Agency shall acknowledge to the Complainant that it has received the remanded claims within thirty (30) calendar days of the date this decision was issued. 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 was issued, 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. As provided in the statement entitled "Implementation of the Commission's Decision,” the Agency must send to the Compliance Officer: 1) a copy of the Agency’s letter of acknowledgment to Complainant, 2) a copy of the Agency’s notice that transmits the investigative file and notice of rights, and 3) either a copy of the complainant’s request for a hearing, a copy of complainant’s request for a FAD, or a statement from the agency that it did not receive a response from complainant by the end of the election period. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION’S DECISION (K0618) Under 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(c) and § 1614.502, compliance with the Commission’s corrective action is mandatory. Within seven (7) calendar days of the completion of each ordered corrective action, the Agency shall submit via the Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP) supporting documents in the digital format required by the Commission, referencing the compliance docket number under which compliance was being monitored. Once all compliance is complete, the Agency shall submit via FedSEP a final compliance report in the digital format required by the Commission. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). 2019003189 4 The Agency’s final report must contain supporting documentation when previously not uploaded, and the Agency must send a copy of all submissions to the Complainant and his/her representative. 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 (M0617) 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. A party shall have twenty (20) calendar days of receipt of another party’s timely request for reconsideration in which to submit a brief or statement in opposition. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at Chap. 9 § VII.B (Aug. 5, 2015). All requests and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Complainant’s request may be submitted via regular mail to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. 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 agency’s request must be submitted in digital format via the EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). The request or opposition must also include proof of service on the other party. 2019003189 5 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 (Z0815) If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant’s Right to File a Civil Action for the specific time limits). FOR THE COMMISSION: ______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden’s signature Carlton M. Hadden, Director Office of Federal Operations September 4, 2019 Date Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation