William W. Walton, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJun 3, 2002
01A03592_r (E.E.O.C. Jun. 3, 2002)

01A03592_r

06-03-2002

William W. Walton, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


William W. Walton v. United States Postal Service

01A03592

June 3, 2002

.

William W. Walton,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A03592

Agency No. 4C-150-0043-00

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from an agency

decision pertaining to 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. The Commission accepts the appeal

in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.

Complainant contacted the EEO office claiming that he was discriminated

against on January 18, 2000, when his supervisor gave him a

pre-disciplinary discussion. Informal efforts to resolve complainant's

concerns were unsuccessful. Subsequently, on March 8, 2000, complainant

filed a formal complaint.

On March 16, 2000, the agency issued a decision dismissing the complaint

for failure to state a claim. The agency reasoned that the alleged

incident did not result in any concrete effect on complainant's employment

status. Complainant did not suffer any measurable harm.

On appeal, complainant's representative argues that complainant has

been aggrieved because this pre-disciplinary discussion may lead to

a suspension. He further argues that complainant was subject to a

hostile work environment because the claim against him was not properly

investigated by his supervisor.

The regulation set forth at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) provides, in

relevant part, that an agency shall dismiss a complaint that fails to

state a claim. An agency shall accept a complaint from any aggrieved

employee or applicant for employment who believes that he or she has been

discriminated against by that agency because of race, color, religion,

sex, national origin, age or disabling condition. 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.103,

106(a). The Commission's federal sector case precedent has long defined

an "aggrieved employee" as one who suffers a present harm or loss with

respect to a term, condition, or privilege of employment for which

there is a remedy. Diaz v. Department of the Air Force, EEOC Request

No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994).

However, it is well-settled that, unless the conduct is very severe,

a single incident or a group of isolated incidents will not be regarded

as creating a discriminatory work environment. See James v. Department

of Health and Human Services, EEOC Request No. 05940327 (September 20,

1994); Walker v. Ford Motor Company, 684 F.2d 1355 (11 Cir. 1982).

Complainant claims that his supervisor gave him a pre-disciplinary

discussion and threatened him with discipline if another claim of

sexual harassment was filed against him. Based on a review of the

record, it does not appear that any concrete action was taken against

complainant as a result of the alleged incident. Complainant has failed

to establish that the discussion resulted in any loss or harm to a term,

condition or privilege of employment. Moreover, complainant's receipt

of a pre-disciplinary discussion, without more, does not reflect the

degree of severity or pervasiveness necessary to state a claim of a

hostile work environment. Consequently, the Commissions finds that

complainant has failed to state a claim. Accordingly, the agency's

decision to dismiss the complaint was proper and is hereby 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

June 3, 2002

__________________

Date