Bruce E. Mason, Complainant,v.Janet Napolitano, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJan 27, 2010
0120093401 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 27, 2010)

0120093401

01-27-2010

Bruce E. Mason, Complainant, v. Janet Napolitano, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, Agency.


Bruce E. Mason,

Complainant,

v.

Janet Napolitano,

Secretary,

Department of Homeland Security,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120093401

Agency No. HS-09-TSA-004036

DECISION

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

final decision dated July 16, 2009, dismissing 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.

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

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

During the pertinent period, complainant worked as a Transportation

Security Inspector at a Virginia facility of the agency. He filed a

formal EEO complaint alleging that the agency subjected him to hostile

work environment harassment on the bases of sex (male) and religion

(Christian) when, in February 2009, his coworkers showed him an email

that an Assistant Director (S1) sent to several employees containing a

picture of two little girls holding valentines with the following caption:

"Peggy had many valentine cards while Viola only had one. Peggy is a

whore."1 Complainant stated that the email offended him as a Christian

and father of two, and that S1's behavior is consistently offensive.

Complainant further asserted that the coworkers who received the email

were also offended, but were afraid of retaliatory action on the part

of S1 if they complained.

In its July 16 decision, the agency dismissed complainant's claim

pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1), for failure to state a claim.

Specifically, the agency found that complainant was not aggrieved by

the action and that the action was not severe or pervasive. Further,

the agency stated that the email was not addressed to/directed toward

complainant and that complainant failed to show a nexus between the email

and his protected classes. The instant appeal from complainant followed.

On appeal, complainant contended that he was subjected to third-party

sexual harassment.

Alleged harassment by a supervisor that does not result in a tangible

employment action may still state a viable claim of discrimination

if the alleged conduct was "so objectively offensive as to alter the

'conditions' of the victim's employment." Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore

Services, Inc., 118 S. Ct. 998, 1002 (1998). Considering the incident

alleged in this case in the light most favorable to the complainant, we

determine that complainant's claim is insufficient to state a claim of

harassment. See Cobb v. Dep't of the Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05970077

(March 13, 1997). The contention of third party versus direct harassment

does not change this determination. While acknowledging the inappropriate

nature of the email, especially if sent by a management representative,

we find that this single isolated incident, even if proven true, was not

sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of complainant's

employment. See Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 21 (1993).

However, with that finding, we caution the agency regarding its duty to

engage in proactive prevention of incidents like this one in order to

avoid future liability for an unlawful hostile work environment.

Accordingly, for the reasons discussed above, we AFFIRM the agency's

final decision dismissing complainant's complaint.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M1208)

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 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 (S0408)

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 (Z1008)

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

January 27, 2010

__________________

Date

1 Complainant submitted a copy of the email with his appeal that indicates

that S1 sent the email to nine recipients.

??

??

??

??

2

0120093401

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

3

0120093401