01A44418_r
10-19-2004
Cleveland Percy, Complainant, v. Ann M. Veneman, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Agency.
Cleveland Percy v. Department of Agriculture
01A44418
October 19, 2004
.
Cleveland Percy,
Complainant,
v.
Ann M. Veneman,
Secretary,
Department of Agriculture,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A44418
Agency No. USDACR040307
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the agency's
decision dated April 16, 2004, 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.
and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act),
as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq. In his complaint, complainant
alleged that he was subjected to on-going harassment on the bases of race
(African-American), sex (male), disability, and reprisal for prior EEO
activity when on November 19, 2003, the Supervisor accused him of being
absent without leave.
The agency dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim of
harassment. According to the agency, the Supervisor contacted complainant
to follow up on complainant's plans to return to work. During the
conversation, the Supervisor advised complainant that if he was not aware
of complainant's leave status complainant may be considered absent without
leave. The Supervisor did not place complainant on absence without leave.
Since complainant was not placed on absence without leave, and no adverse
employment action was taken against complainant, the agency concluded that
complainant was not aggrieved, and the complaint failed to state a claim.
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. 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).
In determining whether a harassment complaint states a claim in cases
where a complainant had not alleged disparate treatment regarding a
specific term, condition, or privilege of employment, the Commission
has repeatedly examined whether a complainant's harassment claims,
when considered together and assumed to be true, were sufficient to
state a hostile or abusive work environment claim. See Estate of
Routson v. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, EEOC Request
No. 05970388 (February 26, 1999).
The Commission finds that the agency properly dismissed complainant's
complaint. Complainant has not presented sufficient evidence to show
that he is an aggrieved employee. There is no evidence in the record to
show that complainant was subjected to any adverse action with respect
to a term, condition or privilege of employment as a result of the
November 19, 2003 conversation with his Supervisor. Additionally,
the record is devoid of any evidence to support complainant's claim
of on-going harassment. Complainant has not claimed that he suffered
any concrete adverse employment action. The Commission has repeatedly
found that remarks or comments unaccompanied by a concrete agency action
usually are not a direct and personal deprivation sufficient to render
an individual aggrieved. See Backo v. United States Postal Service,
EEOC Request No. 05960227 (June 10, 1996); Henry v. United States Postal
Service, EEOC Request No.05940695 (February 9, 1995). Complainant has
not presented evidence to show that the harassment complained of is
sufficiently severe and/or pervasive as to alter the conditions of
his employment.
Therefore, the agency's decision dismissing the 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
October 19, 2004
__________________
Date