EEOC Appeal No. 0120170352
02-22-2017
Hannah C. v. U.S. Postal Serv.
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Hannah C,1
Complainant,
v.
Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Capital Metro Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120170352
Agency No. 4K300020416
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the Agency's decision dated October 17, 2016, dismissing her complaint alleging 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.
BACKGROUND
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a City Carrier Assistant at the Agency's Post Office in LaGrange, Georgia.
On July 29, 2016, Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency subjected her to unlawful retaliatory harassment for engaging in protected activity. As examples of the harassment, Complainant alleged: (1) on May 14, 2016, she was instructed to check-in with her supervisor on a daily basis after she completed her duties; (2) on May 21, 2016, after reporting that a co-worker spoke to her in a demeaning manner, management failed to properly address the matter; (3) on May 21 and 22, 2016, she submitted two separate leave requests for May 24, 2016, that were denied; (4), on May 23, 2016, she received a written reprimand for insubordination; and (5) on May 24, 2016, she became aware that her transfer request to another work location was denied.
The Agency initially accepted the complaint for investigation. However, after the investigator gathered an affidavit from Complainant, the Agency issued a final decision dismissing the complaint, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1), for failure to state a claim, stating that Complainant provided an affidavit where she specifically stated that her EEO activity was not a factor in any of her claims.
The instant appeal followed.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
We find the Agency erred in dismissing the instant complaint for failure to state a claim. Complainant, by providing a basis cognizable under Title VII and detailing a set of facts in her formal complaint, has provided sufficient information to state a claim. See Diaz v. Dep't of the Air Force, EEOC Request No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994). The Agency's reason for dismissing the complaint addresses the merits of the claim without completing a proper investigation as required by the regulations. We find that the Agency's articulated reason for the dismissal - that Complainant made statements about her reprisal claims - goes to the merits of Complainant's complaint, and is irrelevant to the procedural issue of whether she has stated a viable claim under Title VII and the 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 regulations. See Osborne v. Department of the Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05960111 (July 19, 1996); Lee v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05930220 (August 12, 1993); Ferrazzoli v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05910642 (August 15, 1991). The evidence concerning her claim should be developed by completing the investigation, and the Agency may then take her statements into consideration in issuing a decision on the merits of that claim.
In this regard, we find that the questions asked of Complainant on the affidavit form gathered during the partial investigation were very confusing. It was unclear what was being referenced when she was asked about "current EEO activity." Did this actually intended to asked her about her "prior" EEO activity for which Complainant might have been the victim of retaliation or was the question referencing the instant complaint? In resuming the investigation, the investigator should clarify Complainant's statements about what protected activity she is claiming resulted in the alleged retaliation. She should also be allowed to answer in a more narrative format in order to fully understand her claims. Moreover, we note that, in the narrative statement attached to her complaint form, Complainant alleged that on May 14, 2016, she announced her intention to file an EEO complaint in the instant case and believed management was aware of this. Therefore, even without any prior EEO activity, everything that happened after this announcement could state a claim of retaliation for this expressed intention to use the EEO complaint process.
Accordingly, the Agency's final decision dismissing Complainant's complaint is REVERSED. The complaint is hereby REMANDED to the Agency for further processing in accordance with this decision and the Order below.
ORDER (E1016)
The Agency is ordered to process the remanded claims in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.108 et seq. The Agency shall acknowledge to the Complainant that it has received the remanded claims within thirty (30) calendar days of the date this decision was issued. 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 was issued, 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 a 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 (K0610)
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 77960, Washington, DC 20013. 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 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) (1994 & Supp. IV 1999). If the Complainant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409.
COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (R0610)
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 (Z0815)
If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant's Right to File a Civil Action for the specific time limits).
FOR THE COMMISSION:
______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden's signature
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
February 22, 2017
__________________
Date
1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant's name when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission's website.
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
2
0120170352
4
0120170352