01a61124_r
05-02-2006
Rachel R. Hongell, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Rachel R. Hongell v. United States Postal Service
01A61124
May 2, 2006
.
Rachel R. Hongell,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A61124
Agency No. 4E-840-0029-05
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the final
agency decision dated October 18, 2005, dismissing her formal EEO
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.
On October 3, 2005, complainant filed a formal complaint. Therein,
complainant claimed that she was the victim of unlawful employment
discrimination reprisal for prior EEO activity.
On October 18, 2005, the agency issued the instant final decision.
Therein, the agency determined that complainant's formal complaint was
comprised of the following claim:
on August 4 and 24, 2005, the EEO Manager Dispute Resolution violated
complainant's privacy when he shared confidential EEO information with
her physical therapist and the National Association of Letter Carriers
(NALC) President.
In its October 18, 2005 final decision, the agency dismissed complainant's
complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) for failure to state
a claim. The agency found that complainant was not aggrieved. The agency
further found that even assuming arguendo complainant's privacy was
violated, there was no evidence in the record that indicated complainant
was harmed by the agency's purported actions. Furthermore, the agency
stated that an alleged violation of the Privacy Act is not within the
purview of Title VII and the proper forum of appeal is not within the EEO
complaint process but rather under the provisions of the Privacy Act.
The agency dismissed the instant complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �
1614.107(a)(1), which provides, in relevant part, that an agency shall
dismiss a complaint that fails to state a claim. However, we find
that the matter raised in complainant's compliant is more properly
viewed as a "spin-off" complaint, i.e., it alleges dissatisfaction
with the processing of an EEO complaint. EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �
1614.107(a)(8) provides that such complaints must be dismissed. Where, as
here, a complainant raises a concern about the processing of a complaint
that is still pending, the agency should refer the complainant to the
agency official responsible for the quality of complaint processing, and
that official should address the matter. Complainant may still contact
the EEO Director regarding any dissatisfaction with the EEO counseling
she received, but it will not affect our disposition of this complaint.
Therefore, we find that the agency properly dismissed the complaint.
Finally, to the extent that the instant complaint is construed as alleging
a specific violation of the Privacy Act, the Commission notes that the
Privacy Act provides an exclusive statutory framework governing the
disclosure of identifiable information contained in federal systems of
records and jurisdiction rests exclusively in the United States District
Courts for matters brought under the Privacy Act. See Bucci v. Department
of Education, EEOC Request Nos. 05890289, 05890290, 05890291 (April 12,
1989).
Accordingly, the agency's final decision 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
May 2, 2006
__________________
Date