Gerard A. Hill, et al., Complainant,v.Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (New York Metro Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJan 6, 2012
0120073649 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 6, 2012)

0120073649

01-06-2012

Gerard A. Hill, et al., Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (New York Metro Area), Agency.




Gerard A. Hill, et al.,

Complainant,

v.

Patrick R. Donahoe,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service

(New York Metro Area),

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120073649

Hearing No. 520-2007-00356X

Agency No. 4A-117-0037-07

DISMISSAL OF APPEAL

Complainant, as Class Agent, filed an appeal with this Commission from an

Agency final decision regarding his equal employment opportunity (EEO)

complaint alleging employment discrimination in violation of the Age

Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. §�

�621 et seq. Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409, the appeal is DISMISSED.

At the time of the events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant

worked as a Letter Carrier at the Agency’s Smithtown Post Office in

Smithtown, New York. On April 5, 2007, Complainant, as Class Agent,

filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against

him and other Agency employees on the basis of age (over 40) when:

1. Management used intimidation, harassment, threats, and bullying to

either separate, terminate, or force the resignation of senior employees;

2. Management treated the class action group with no dignity, respect,

and fairness;

3. Management withheld employees pay without just cause;

4. Management gave excessive quantity and unwarranted disciplinary action;

5. Management used verbal threats towards employees;

6. Management gave conflicting instructions to create opportunity for

more discipline;

7. Management showed total disregard of contractual rights with an

attitude of “Grieve it if you don’t like it;”

8. Management was overstaffed in order to implement its extreme managerial

style;

9. Management searched and seized employee’s personal affects on the

street in view of patrons; and

10. Management created an extremely hostile work environment and failed

to provide a safe and harmonious place to work for employees.

The Agency referred Complainant’s class complaint to an AJ. On June

20, 2007, the AJ issued a decision denying class certification. In her

decision, the AJ found that Complainant failed to establish “the

class complaint prerequisites of commonality, typicality, numerosity,

and adequate representation.” The AJ ordered the Agency to process

the complaint as an individual complaint of discrimination and inform

Complainant of his appeal rights. On July 2, 2007, the Agency issued

its final order fully adopting the AJ’s decision. On July 25, 2007,

Complainant filed an appeal of the Agency’s July 2, 2007, final order

with the Commission.

On October 30, 2008, a civil action was filed by James Sweeney

(identified as Civil Action No. 2:08-cv-04417-ARL) in the United States

District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Other plaintiffs,

including Complainant, later consented to join the lawsuit. The record

discloses that the claims raised therein are the same as those raised

in the instant complaint.

The Commission’s regulation found at 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409 provides

that the filing of a civil action “shall terminate Commission processing

of the appeal.” Commission regulations mandate dismissal of the

EEO complaint under these circumstances so as to prevent a Complainant

from simultaneously pursuing both administrative and judicial remedies

on the same matters, wasting resources, and creating the potential

for inconsistent or conflicting decisions, and in order to grant due

deference to the authority of the federal district court. See Stromgren

v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05891079 (May 7, 1990);

Sandy v. Dep’t of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. 01893513 (Oct. 19, 1989);

Kotwitz v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Request No. 05880114 (Oct. 25, 1988).

Accordingly, Complainant’s appeal is hereby DISMISSED. See 29

C.F.R. § 1614.409.

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

January 6, 2012

Date

2

0120073649

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

2

0120073649