Dawn Bartlett, Complainant,v.Anthony J. Principi, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionFeb 6, 2001
01a05382 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 6, 2001)

01a05382

02-06-2001

Dawn Bartlett, Complainant, v. Anthony J. Principi, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.


Dawn Bartlett v. Department of Veterans Affairs

01A05382

February 6, 2001

.

Dawn Bartlett,

Complainant,

v.

Anthony J. Principi,

Secretary,

Department of Veterans Affairs,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A05382

Agency No. 200P2368

DECISION

Dawn Bartlett (complainant) filed a timely appeal with this Commission

from a final agency decision (FAD) dated July 14, 2000 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.<1> In her complaint, complainant alleged

that she was subjected to discrimination on the basis of sex (female)

when she discovered on March 27, 1999 that she was not selected for a

position as a Medical Technologist.

The agency dismissed the complaint pursuant to EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �

1614.107(a)(4), noting that complainant raised the same matter in a

negotiated grievance procedure that permits allegations of discrimination.

The agency noted that complainant filed a grievance on April 28, 2000,

almost two months before she filed an EEO complaint.

On appeal, complainant contends that because the agency ruled, at

the third step of the grievance process, that the issues surrounding

complainant's non-selection were non-grievable, her election is void.

She also contends that the filling of an unfair labor practice on the

matter of her non-selection was filed by the union to protect the union's

interests and does not interfere with her EEO complaint. In response,

the agency notes that complainant appealed the agency's decision that

her non-selection is non-grievable and argues that her election of the

grievance process is void only if she withdraws this appeal. The agency

also disputes complainant's argument that the unfair labor practice was

filed by the Union to protect its interests and therefore does not impact

her EEO complaint.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(4) provides that the agency

should dismiss a complaint where the complainant has raised the

matter in a negotiated grievance procedure that permits allegations

of discrimination. The Commission has previously held that where a

complainant filed a grievance prior to filing an EEO complaint, but

the grievance was denied on the grounds that the subject matter of the

grievance was not a grievable matter, the complainant did not make a

true election. See Chai v. National Aeronautics and Space Administration,

EEOC Request No. 05970016 (July 10, 1998); Holmes v. Department of Navy,

EEOC Request No. 05931010 (October 14, 1994). However, the regulations

further provide that a grievant may not appeal to the Commission when

the matter initially raised in the negotiated grievance procedure is

still ongoing in that process, is in arbitration, is before the FLRA,

is appealable to the MSPB or if 5 U.S.C. 7121(d) is inapplicable to the

involved agency. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.401(d). In the case at hand,

it is undisputed that upon receiving the agency's decision that the

matter at issue is non-grievable, the Union filed a notice of intent to

invoke arbitration and that complainant has not dismissed her appeal of

the grievability issue. Accordingly, the agency's decision to dismiss

complainant's EEO complaint was proper and it is hereby 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

February 6, 2001

Date

1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's federal

sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations apply

to all federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in the

administrative process. Consequently, the Commission will apply

the revised regulations found at 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 in deciding the

present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the

Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.