Timothy J. Mulvihill, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 6, 2007
0120080016 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 6, 2007)

0120080016

12-06-2007

Timothy J. Mulvihill, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Timothy J. Mulvihill,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120080016

Agency No. 4A117011007

DECISION

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

decision dated August 29, 2007, dismissing his complaint of unlawful

employment discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in

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

Upon review, the Commission finds that complainant's complaint was

properly dismissed pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) for failure

to state a claim.

In a complaint dated August 21, 2007, complainant alleged that he was

discriminated against on the basis of age (over 40) when he was subjected

to a hostile work environment with respect to "working conditions,

threats, withholding of pay, excessive and unwarranted disciplinary

actions, seizure of personal effects, and failure to provide a safe

working environment."1

The Commission notes that complainant was part of a group of employees

which filed a class complaint concerning a hostile work environment. The

class complainant was not certified by an EEOC Administrative Judge,2 (AJ)

and thereafter complainant filed the instant individual complaint. In his

formal complaint, complainant does not address any individual allegations

or specify what actions were taken against him. The Commission finds

that complainant's complaint is a generalized grievance and, therefore,

fails to state a claim. Complainant failed to identify a specific harm

that he sustained. Complainant cannot pursue a generalized grievance

that members of one protected group are afforded benefits not offered to

other protected groups, unless he further alleges some specific injury

to him as a result of the alleged discriminatory practice. See Warth

v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 499 (1975); Crandall v. Department of Veterans

Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05970508 (September 11, 1997) (claim that nurse

practitioners in one unit received more favorable treatment than nurse

practitioners in other units was a generalized grievance); Rodriguez

v. Department of the Treasury, EEOC Appeal No. 01970736 (August 28,

1997). The Commission further notes that the EEO counselor attempted

to get information from complainant to clarify specific harm, but such

information was not forthcoming. As noted, the formal complaint failed

to address any specific actions taken by the agency specifically against

complainant.

The Commission finds that the complaint fails to state a claim under the

EEOC regulations because complainant failed to show that he suffered harm

or loss with respect to a term, condition, or privilege of employment

for which there is a remedy. See Diaz v. Department of the Air Force,

EEOC Request No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994). Accordingly, the agency's

final decision dismissing complainant's complaint 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

December 6, 2007

__________________

Date

1 Complainant did not provide any definition of the issues in his

individual complaint. Therefore, the agency framed the claims based on

information provided in the EEO counselor's report. Complainant did not

object to the framing of the claims, as set forth in the final agency

decision.

2 The decision of the AJ was appealed to the Commission and the matter

is pending. Appeal No. 0120073649.

??

??

??

??

2

0120080016

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

3

0120080016