Francisco Pecunia-Vega, Appellant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 9, 1999
01986714_r (E.E.O.C. Dec. 9, 1999)

01986714_r

12-09-1999

Francisco Pecunia-Vega, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Francisco Pecunia-Vega v. United States Postal Service

01986779

December 9, 1999

Francisco Pecunia-Vega, )

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Appeal Nos. 01986779

) 01986807

William J. Henderson, ) Agency Nos. 4D-280-0122-98

Postmaster General, ) 4D-280-0137-98

United States Postal Service, )

Agency. )

____________________________________)

DECISION

On September 12, 1998, complainant filed timely appeals with this

Commission from final agency decisions (FADs) dated August 27, 1998,

and August 28, 1998, pertaining to his complaints of unlawful employment

discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of

1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.<1> Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �

1614.606, the Commission hereby consolidates appellant's complaints

for decision on appeal. In his complaints, complainant alleged that

he was subjected to discrimination on the bases of race (Hispanic),

national origin (Puerto Rican), and in reprisal for prior EEO activity

when on April 29, 1998, and April 30, 1998, complainant's supervisor

(S1) specified which portion of complainant's route was to be handed

off for auxiliary assistance.

The agency dismissed complainant's complaints for failure to state

a claim. Specifically, the agency concluded that complainant failed

to show how S1's actions caused him harm to the terms, conditions,

or privileges of his employment, and, therefore, he was not aggrieved

under the EEOC regulations.

On appeal, complainant contends that similarly-situated co-workers were

permitted to decide which portions of their routes were to be handed off

for auxiliary assistance, and that he was singled out by S1 when he was

not asked which portions of his route were to be handed off.

In response, the agency contends that S1 determines the portions of

routes to be handed off for auxiliary assistance in all cases for

which assistance is requested. Consequently, the agency contends that

complainant was treated no differently than his co-workers in this

respect. Also, the agency argues that on April 30, 1998, complainant's

route had 2.25 feet less than reference volume and that complainant did

not request assistance.

Volume 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999)(to be codified and hereinafter

cited as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1)) provides, in relevant part, that

an agency shall dismiss a complaint, or portion thereof, that fails to

state a claim. 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;

1614.106(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 22, 1994).

In the instant matter, the Commission finds that the agency erred

in dismissing complainant's complaints for failure to state a claim.

Complainant alleged that in contrast to the routes of his co-workers,

S1 specified which portions of complainant's route were to be handed

off for auxiliary assistance. As this decision directly affects the

terms, conditions, or privileges of complainant's employment; i.e.,

which portions of complainant's route he would be responsible for,

we find that complainant was aggrieved.

To the extent that the agency contends that S1 determines the portions

of all routes to be handed out for auxiliary assistance, or that

complainant had less reference volume on April 30, 1998, we find that

the agency is addressing the merits of complainant's complaints without

a proper investigation as required by the regulations. The agency's

justification for S1's actions is irrelevant to the procedural issue

of whether complainant has stated a justiciable claim under Title VII.

See Osborne v. Department of the Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05960111

(July 19, 1996); Lee v. USPS, EEOC Request No. 05930220 (August 12,

1993); Ferrazzoli v. USPS, EEOC Request No. 05910642 (August 15, 1991).

Accordingly, the agency's decision to dismiss the complaints was improper,

and is hereby REVERSED. The complaints are REMANDED to the agency for

further processing in accordance with this decision and the Order below.

ORDER

The agency is ORDERED to consolidate complainant's claims and process them

in accordance with 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656-7 (1999) (to be codified

and hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.108). The agency shall

acknowledge to the complainant that it has received the remanded claims

and consolidated the complaints within thirty (30) calendar days of the

date this decision becomes final. The agency shall issue to complainant

a copy of the investigative file and also shall notify complainant of

the appropriate rights within one hundred fifty (150) calendar days

of the date this decision becomes final, unless the matter is otherwise

resolved prior to that time. If the complainant requests a final decision

without a hearing, the agency shall issue a final decision within sixty

(60) days of receipt of complainant's request.

A copy of the agency's letter of acknowledgment to complainant and an

copy of the notice that transmits the investigative file and notice of

rights must be sent to the Compliance Officer as referenced below.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K1199)

Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory.

The agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30)

calendar days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The

report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal

Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. The agency's report must contain supporting

documentation, and the agency must send a copy of all submissions to the

complainant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's order,

the complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement of the order.

29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(a). The complainant also has the right to file a

civil action to enforce compliance with the Commission's order prior

to or following an administrative petition for enforcement. See 64

Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659-60 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407, 1614.408), and 29 C.F.R. �

1614.503(g). Alternatively, the complainant has the right to file a

civil action on the underlying complaint in accordance with the paragraph

below entitled "Right to File A Civil Action." 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407

and 1614.408. A civil action for enforcement or a civil action on the

underlying complaint is subject to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. �

2000e-16(c)(Supp. V 1993). If the complainant files a civil action, the

administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for

enforcement, will be terminated. See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999)

(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409).

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M1199)

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

64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405). 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999)

(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 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 (R1199)

This is a decision requiring the agency to continue its administrative

processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil

action, you have the right to file such action in an appropriate United

States District Court WITHIN NINETY (90) CALENDAR DAYS from the date

that you receive this decision. In the alternative, you may file a

civil action AFTER ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY (180) CALENDAR DAYS of the date

you filed your complaint with the agency, or filed your appeal with the

Commission. 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. 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:

December 9, 1999

Date Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision

was received within five (5) calendar days of mailing. I certify that

the decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative

(if applicable), and the agency on:

_______________ __________________________

Date Equal Employment Assistant

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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the

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

Commission's website at WWW.EEOC.GOV.