Donald Smith, Complainant,v.Dr. James B. Peake, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMay 1, 2008
0120081597 (E.E.O.C. May. 1, 2008)

0120081597

05-01-2008

Donald Smith, Complainant, v. Dr. James B. Peake, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.


Donald Smith,

Complainant,

v.

Dr. James B. Peake,

Secretary,

Department of Veterans Affairs,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120081597

Agency No. 200406522007102596

DECISION

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

decision dated August 1, 2007, 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.

In a complaint dated June 21, 2007, complainant alleged that he was

subjected to discrimination on the basis of reprisal when he was removed

from his position for violating a last-chance agreement.

Effective April 21, 2006, complainant was removed from his position as

a Health Technician, GS-5, at the agency's medical center in Richmond,

Virginia. The removal decision was issued on April 17, 2006, and stated

the reason for the removal was for violating a last-chance agreement.

The record reveals that complainant was initially informed that he had

violated the last-chance agreement on March 31, 2006, and he immediately

pursued the matter through the negotiated grievance system. Once a final

decision had been made on his removal, complainant filed an appeal of

the removal with the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). In a decision

dated September 14, 2006, the MSPB found that although complainant had

violated the last chance agreement, he had waived his right to appeal

the matter to the MSPB. As such, the MSPB dismissed the matter for lack

of jurisdiction.

Complainant contacted an EEO counselor on May 9, 2007, concerning the

instant complaint, alleging he was discriminatorily removed from his

position based on retaliation for having filed the union grievance over

the March 2006 charge that he had violated the last-chance agreement. The

agency dismissed the complaint, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(4),

because complainant had previously raised the same matter before the

MSPB and in the grievance process.

As noted above, the record shows that the MSPB dismissed the matter

for lack of jurisdiction, in which case an agency would then usually be

required to process a subsequent EEO complaint on the matter.1 Moreover,

the record is not clear that complainant's actual removal in April 2006

was pursued through the grievance process, as opposed to the March 2006

preliminary charge of breach of the last-chance agreement.

However, the Commission finds that the matter is more properly dismissed

for failure to contact an EEO counselor in a timely manner. EEOC

Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105(a)(1) requires that complaints of

discrimination should be brought to the attention of the Equal Employment

Opportunity Counselor within forty-five (45) days of the date of the

matter alleged to be discriminatory or, in the case of a personnel action,

within forty-five (45) days of the effective date of the action. Here,

the complainant did not contact the EEO counselor until nearly nine

months after he received the MSPB decision and over a year after his

removal was effective.

In addition, the Commission notes that complainant alleges reprisal for

filing his union grievances - but there is nothing in the grievances

provided that he raised claims of discrimination therein. Without an

allegation that he was being retaliated against for engaging in prior EEO

activity, as opposed to union activity, complainant has failed to assert

a viable claim of unlawful retaliation under the anti-discrimination

statutes. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1).

Accordingly, the Commission finds that the agency's dismissal should be

affirmed, albeit on other grounds.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0408)

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 (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 (Z0408)

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

May 1, 2008

__________________

Date

1 We note, however, that there is no indication that complainant raised

his discrimination claims before the MSPB.

??

??

??

??

2

0120081597

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

4

0120081597