01984024_r
06-18-1999
Beatrice S. Johnson, Appellant, v. Louis Caldera, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.
Beatrice S. Johnson, )
Appellant, )
)
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01984024
) Agency No. ANEPFO9804I0010
)
Louis Caldera, )
Secretary, )
Department of the Army, )
Agency. )
______________________________)
DECISION
INTRODUCTION
Appellant filed an appeal with this Commission from a final decision of
the agency concerning her complaint of unlawful employment discrimination
in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,
42 U.S.C. �2000e et seq. The final agency decision was dated March
24, 1998. The appeal was postmarked April 20, 1998. Accordingly,
the appeal is timely (see, 29 C.F.R. �1614.402(a)), and is accepted in
accordance with EEOC Order No. 960, as amended.
ISSUE PRESENTED
The issue on appeal is whether the agency properly dismissed appellant's
complaint as moot.
BACKGROUND
The record indicates that appellant, a branch chief, filed a formal
complaint dated February 12, 1998, alleging that since April 1, 1996,
she was continuously subjected to harassment by two agency managerial
officials which created a hostile work environment. Specifically,
appellant indicated that: on October 23, 1997, an agency managerial
official sent her an e-mail message containing derogatory remarks that
her branch was incompetent and its response to his inquiry concerning
SARSS was wrong; on December 1, 1997, the agency managerial official made
derogatory remarks in response to her request to become a voting member
of the IMSC Group; and her supervisory role was continuously undermined.
As relief, appellant requested, inter alia, that she and her branch be
reassigned to another commander.
On March 24, 1998, the agency issued a final decision dismissing the
complaint as moot. The agency stated that the responsible managerial
official subsequently issued memoranda dated March 5 and 12, 1998,
to subordinate divisions and to appellant. Therein, appellant was
given assurances that the proper chain of command would be utilized
in making requests for information, and that no further harassment
would be tolerated in her work place in order to ensure her a work
environment free from any harassment. The agency indicated that this
interim relief completely and irrevocably eradicated the effects of the
alleged violations.
On appeal, appellant does not raise any new contentions.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(e) provides that the agency shall
dismiss a complaint or a portion of a complaint that is moot. The issues
raised in a complaint of discrimination are no longer in dispute (1) if
it can be said with assurance that there is no reasonable expectation
that the alleged violation will recur, and (2) if interim relief or
events have completely and irrevocably eradicated the effects of the
alleged violation. County of Los Angeles v. Davis, 440 U.S. 625 (1979).
In her complaint, appellant alleged harassment which created a hostile
work environment. Appellant identified three incidents concerning
derogatory remarks and her supervisory role being undermined.
The Commission has held that where a complainant alleges harassment,
he/she is entitled to specific assurances that no further harassment
will occur. See Gerencher v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request
No. 05910947 (January 31, 1992). In the present case, the responsible
official issued memoranda providing appellant with specific assurances
that no further harassment will occur and her work environment would be
free from any further harassment. We find that the subject assurances
on the part of the agency have adequately rendered the complaint moot.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the agency's decision to dismiss appellant's complaint as
moot was proper and is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0795)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this
case if the appellant or the agency submits a written request containing
arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:
1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available
when the previous decision was issued; or
2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,
regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or
3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial
precedential implications.
Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST
BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this
decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive
a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in
opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider
MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party
WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request
to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.407. All requests and arguments
must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received
by the Commission.
Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your
request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances
have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,
a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the
delay and 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).
RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0993)
It is the position of the Commission that 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.
You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have
interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that
a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the
date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action
is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)
CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult
an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction
in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)
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:
June 18, 1999
DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director
Office of Federal Operations