Federico A. Remorin, Complainant,v.Dr. Donald C. Winter, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMay 9, 2008
0120081757 (E.E.O.C. May. 9, 2008)

0120081757

05-09-2008

Federico A. Remorin, Complainant, v. Dr. Donald C. Winter, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.


Federico A. Remorin,

Complainant,

v.

Dr. Donald C. Winter,

Secretary,

Department of the Navy,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120081757

Agency No. 086158100145

DECISION

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

decision dated January 2, 2008, 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. In his complaint,

complainant alleged that he was subjected to discrimination on the bases

of national origin (Filipino) and reprisal when he was not granted Civil

Service retirement coverage on January 8, 1988. Complainant retired

August 28, 1992.

The agency dismissed the matter because complainant was not a U.S. citizen

and hence did not have standing to file a claim. The Commission finds

the matter is more appropriately addressed with respect to the issue

of timeliness. 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. The Commission has adopted a "reasonable suspicion"

standard (as opposed to a "supportive facts" standard) to determine

when the forty-five (45) day limitation period is triggered. See Howard

v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Request No. 05970852 (February 11, 1999).

Thus, the time limitation is not triggered until a complainant reasonably

suspects discrimination, but before all the facts that support a charge

of discrimination have become apparent.

EEOC Regulations provide that the agency or the Commission shall extend

the time limits when the individual shows that he was not notified of the

time limits and was not otherwise aware of them, that he did not know

and reasonably should not have known that the discriminatory matter or

personnel action occurred, that despite due diligence he was prevented

by circumstances beyond her control from contacting the Counselor within

the time limits, or for other reasons considered sufficient by the agency

or the Commission.

The record discloses that the alleged discriminatory event occurred

around January 8, 1988 through August 28, 1992, which is when complainant

retired, but complainant did not initiate contact with an EEO Counselor

until January 2008 which is well beyond the forty-five (45) day limitation

period. The Commission has consistently held that a complainant must

act with due diligence in the pursuit of his claim or the doctrine

of laches may apply. See Becker v. United States Postal Serv., EEOC

Appeal No. 01A45028 (November 18, 2004) (finding that the doctrine of

laches applied when complainant waited over two years from the date of

the alleged discriminatory events before contacting an EEO Counselor);

O'Dell v. Department of Health and Human Serv., EEOC Request No. 05901130

(December 27, 1990). The doctrine of laches is an equitable remedy

under which an individual's failure to pursue diligently his course of

action could bar his claim. Complainant waited more than 15 years from

the date of the alleged discriminatory event which complainant indicates

happened while he was employed until his retirement in August 1992,

before he contacted an EEO Counselor in December, 2007. Complainant has

failed to provide sufficient justification for extending or tolling

the time limit. Accordingly, the agency's final decision dismissing

complainant's complaint is affirmed.

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 9, 2008

__________________

Date

2

0120081757

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

4

0120081757