0120150032
03-04-2015
Complainant, v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Eastern Area), Agency.
Complainant,
v.
Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Eastern Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120150032
Agency No. 1C371004914
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the Agency's decision (Dismissal) dated September 16, 2014, dismissing her 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.
BACKGROUND
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a Mail Handler at the Agency's Memphis Processing & Distribution Center facility in Memphis, Tennessee.
On August 28, 2014, Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency subjected her to discrimination on the basis of reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when:
1. On June 16, 2014, Complainant's supervisor sent Complainant to "the office."1
2. On June 18, 2014, Complainant's supervisor gave Complainant a copy of an investigative interview without a union steward present.
3. On July 2, 2014, Complainant's supervisor gave Complainant instructions that overrode the instructions of another supervisor.
4. On July 29, 2014, Complainant was ordered to sign for a weekly service talk she never received.
5. On August 7, 2014, a supervisor gave Complainant instructions that overrode the instructions provided by Complainant's supervisor.
6. On August 12, 2014, a supervisor paged Complainant to room 140.
7. On August 13, 2014, a supervisor instructed Complainant to stop pulling for one person and instead pull for two others.
8. On August 22, 2014, a supervisor singled Complainant out by searching her clock rings and gate rings.
The Agency dismissed the claims for failure to state a claim. The instant appeal followed,
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
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). When the complainant does not allege he or she is aggrieved within the meaning of the regulations, the agency shall dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1).
In Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 21 (1993), the Supreme Court reaffirmed the holding of Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 67 (1986), that harassment is actionable if it is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the complainant's employment. Thus, not all claims of harassment are actionable. We find that that Complainant's allegations, even viewed collectively and in the light most favorable to him, are not so severe or pervasive as to alter the conditions of his employment, and thus do not state a viable claim of harassment.
With regards to claims alleging reprisal, the Commission interprets the statutory retaliation clauses "to prohibit any adverse treatment that is based on a retaliatory motive and is reasonably likely to deter the charging party or others from engaging in protected activity." EEOC Compliance Manual, Section 8 (Retaliation) at 8-13, 8-14 (May 20, 1998). Following a review of the record, we find that the Agency correctly found that Complainant fails to state a claim. We find that the alleged actions are not reasonably likely to deter Complainant or others from engaging in protected activity.
The Agency's Dismissal is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0610)
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), at 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 (S0610)
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 (Z0610)
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
March 4, 2015
__________________
Date
1 It is not clear from the record what office Complainant is referring to.
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
2
01-2015-0032
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0120150032