Barbara Taylor, Complainant,v.Paul H. O'Neill, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMay 31, 2001
01A12145_r (E.E.O.C. May. 31, 2001)

01A12145_r

05-31-2001

Barbara Taylor, Complainant, v. Paul H. O'Neill, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.


Barbara Taylor v. Department of the Treasury

01A12145

May 31, 2001

.

Barbara Taylor,

Complainant,

v.

Paul H. O'Neill,

Secretary,

Department of the Treasury,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A12145

Agency No. 99-2403R

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from an agency

decision dated January 10, 2001, dismissing her complaint of unlawful

employment discrimination in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

(Title VII), as amended 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq. In her complaint,

complainant alleged that she was subjected to discrimination on the

bases of race and in reprisal for prior protected activity when she

was not selected for two positions.

In a prior final decision, the agency dismissed the complaint on the

grounds the matter was raised by complainant in a prior negotiated

grievance claim. On appeal, the Commission reversed the decision and

remanded the complaint to the agency for processing, finding that

the agency failed to provide portions of the collective bargaining

agreement relevant to the negotiated grievance and EEO process. Taylor

v. Department of the Treasury, EEOC Appeal No. 01A00766 (November 29,

2000).

In the final decision that is the subject of the instant appeal, the

agency provided a copy of the collective bargaining agreement, and again

found that complainant elected to pursue the same matter contained in

the instant complaint through the negotiated grievance procedure, and

dismissed the complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(a)(4).

On appeal, complainant contends that the grievance only involved a claim

regarding the agency's alleged failure to submit all of her paperwork

to the ranking panel. In contrast, complainant contends that the EEO

complaint concerns a claim that complainant was subjected to a pattern of

discrimination dating from 1993 until the time of the complaint. Further,

complainant contends

that the grievance's focus on the proper ranking panel procedures

is distinct from the EEO complainant's claim of discriminatory

non-selection. Moreover, complainant argues that she

retains the right to file an EEO complaint under the collective bargaining

agreement because she never raised the issue of discrimination within

the grievance process.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.301(a) states that when a person is

employed by an agency subject to 5 U.S.C. � 7121(d) and is covered by a

collective bargaining agreement that permits claims of discrimination to

be raised in a negotiated grievance procedure, a person wishing to file a

complaint or grievance on a matter of alleged employment discrimination

must elect to raise the matter under either part 1614 or the negotiated

grievance procedure, but not both. An aggrieved employee who files

a grievance with an agency whose negotiated agreement permits the

acceptance of grievances which allege discrimination may not thereafter

file a complaint on the same matter under this part 1614 irrespective

of whether the agency has informed the individual of the need to elect

or whether the grievance has raised an issue of discrimination.

The Commission finds that the agency properly dismissed the complaint.

The record reflects that complainant's complaint contains a narrative

detailing several discriminatory events allegedly suffered by complainant

during her employment with the agency. However, most of the incidents

described in complainant's complaint are background and historical

information that buttresses the main claim: the non-selection of

complainant by the agency for two vacancies in late 1998. Moreover, we

reject complainant's argument that her grievance concerns a different

matter than her current complaint. The record reflects that a letter

dated February 4, 1999, from complainant's union documents that the

non-selections formed the basis for the grievance. Assuming arguendo

that complainant is correct in characterizing the grievance as focusing

only on the agency's alleged failure to submit important paperwork to

the ranking panel, we nonetheless find that the issue of non-selection

is inextricably intertwined with the grievance to a degree that makes

the two claims essentially the same matter. Consequently, we find that

the EEO complaint and the grievance concern the same matters.

Further, the record documents that the collective bargaining agreement

allows for claims of discrimination to be brought within the grievance

process or EEO process, but not both. We reject complainant's

argument that she may bifurcate her non-discrimination claim from her

discrimination claim on this matter by filing claims in both forums.

Consequently, we find that complainant's complaint should be dismissed

because it raises matters raised in a prior grievance that permits

allegations of discrimination. Accordingly, the agency's dismissal of

complainant's complaint is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0900)

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 31, 2001

__________________

Date