Shermanitav.Ford, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Capital Metro Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMay 3, 2012
0120112720 (E.E.O.C. May. 3, 2012)

0120112720

05-03-2012

Shermanita V. Ford, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Capital Metro Area), Agency.


Shermanita V. Ford,

Complainant,

v.

Patrick R. Donahoe,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service

(Capital Metro Area),

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120112720

Agency No. 4K-200-0068-11

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the Agency's final decision dated March 17, 2011, dismissing 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.

BACKGROUND

During the period at issue, Complainant worked as a Clerk at the Agency's facility in Waldorf, Maryland. On February 2, 2011, Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency subjected her to discrimination on the bases of race, sex, disability, and age.

In its final decision dated March 17, 2011, the Agency determined that Complainant's formal complaint was comprised of the following claim:

On December 1, 2010, [Complainant] was placed on Emergency Placement in Off -Duty Status.

The Agency dismissed Complainant's formal complaint on the grounds that it had been rendered moot. The Agency stated that Complainant had been returned to duty and she was compensated for all lost wages during the emergency placement.

The Agency dismissed Complainant's complaint on the alternate grounds that it failed to state a claim. The Agency reasoned that Complainant was not aggrieved.

Finally, the Agency dismissed Complainant's complaint for failure to cooperate. The Agency stated that Complainant failed to respond to an affidavit package that was delivered to Complainant on March 2, 2011.

CONTENTIONS ON APPEAL

On appeal, Complainant asserts that the Agency's final decision dismissing her complaint is improper. Complainant states that she is being subjected to ongoing harassment. Complainant further provides documentation reflecting that the Agency received her response to its affidavit request on March 17, 2011.

In response, the Agency requests that we affirm its final decision dismissing Complainant's complaint.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Dismissal for Mootness

The Commission has held that an agency must address the issue of compensatory damages when a complainant shows objective evidence that she has incurred compensatory damages, and that the damages are related to the alleged discrimination. Jackson v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 01923399 (Nov. 12, 1992), req. for reconsideration denied, EEOC Request No. 05930306 (Feb. 1, 1993). Should complainant prevail on this complaint, the possibility of an award of compensatory damages exists. See Glover v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 01930696 (Dec. 9, 1993). Because Complainant requested compensatory damages, the Agency should have requested that Complainant provide some objective proof of the alleged damages incurred, as well as objective evidence linking those damages to the adverse actions at issue. See Allen v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Request No. 05970672 (June 12, 1998); Benton v. Dep't of Def., EEOC Appeal No. 01932422 (Dec. 3, 1993). As the Agency failed to address the issue of compensatory damages, we find that dismissal on the grounds that it was rendered moot was improper. See Rouston v. Nat'l Aeronautics and Space Admin., EEOC Request No. 05970388 (Mar. 18, 1999).

Complainant has requested compensatory damages. In addition, Complainant has completed an affidavit regarding this request. The Agency has failed to address Complainant's request for compensatory damages. Based on the foregoing, we find that the Agency improperly dismissed Complainant's complaint on the grounds that it had been rendered moot.

Dismissal for Failure to State a Claim

The Agency improperly dismissed Complainant's formal complaint for failure to state a claim. The only questions for an agency to consider in determining whether a complaint states a claim are: (1) whether complainant is an aggrieved employee; and (2) whether complainant raises employment discrimination on a basis covered by EEO statutes. If these questions are answered in the affirmative, an agency must accept the complaint for processing regardless of its judgment of the merits. See Odoski v. Dep't of Energy, EEOC Appeal No. 01901496 (April 16, 1990). In the instant matter, Complainant is alleging that she was placed in off-day status based on her protected classes; thus, she has set forth an actionable claim.

Dismissal for Failure to Cooperate

The Agency improperly dismissed Complainant's formal complaint for failure to cooperate. The regulation set forth at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(7) provides for the dismissal of a complaint where the agency has provided the complainant with a written request to provide relevant information or otherwise proceed with the complaint, and the complainant has failed to respond to the request within 15 days of its receipt or the complainant's response does not address the agency's request, provided that the request included a notice of the proposed dismissal. The regulation further provides that, instead of dismissing for failure to cooperate, the complaint may be adjudicated if sufficient information for that purpose is available.

The record reflects that Complainant completed the Agency's affidavit request and sent it to the Agency via certified mail postmarked March 14, 2011. The record contains a copy of the completed affidavit which is date stamped that it was received by the Agency on March 17, 2011 (the same date the Agency issued its final decision).

To the extent Complainant is raising new incidents of harassment on appeal, if she wishes to pursue these matters in the EEO process, Complainant should write a letter to the Agency's EEO Director requesting that these new incidents be amended to her complaint. Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at Chapter 5, III, B (Nov. 9, 1999).

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, we REVERSE the Agency's final decision dismissing Complainant's complaint and we REMAND this matter to the Agency for further process in accordance with the ORDER below.

ORDER (E0610)

The Agency is ordered to process the remanded claims in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.108. The Agency shall acknowledge to the Complainant that it has received the remanded claims within thirty (30) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final. 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 becomes final, 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.

A copy of the Agency's letter of acknowledgment to Complainant and a copy of the notice that transmits the investigative file and notice of rights must be sent to the Compliance Officer as referenced below.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0610)

Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory. The Agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30) calendar days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013. The Agency's report must contain supporting documentation, and the Agency must send a copy of all submissions to the Complainant. 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 (M0610)

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), at 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 77960, Washington, DC 20013. 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 (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 (Z0610)

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 from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also 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 with the Court 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 3, 2012

Date

2

0120112720

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

2

0120112720