01984659
10-21-1999
Helen L. Wright, Appellant, v. Janet Reno, Attorney General, Department of Justice, Agency.
Helen L. Wright v. Department of Justice
01984659
October 21, 1999
Helen L. Wright, )
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01984659
) Agency No. P-98-9352
Janet Reno, )
Attorney General, )
Department of Justice, )
Agency. )
)
DECISION
Appellant filed an appeal with this Commission from a final decision of
the agency concerning her complaint 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. The final agency decision was received by
appellant on May 1, 1998. The appeal was postmarked May 19, 1998.
Accordingly, the appeal is timely (see 29 C.F.R. �1614.402(a)), and is
accepted in accordance with EEOC Order No. 960, as amended.
Appellant contacted an EEO counselor on October 3, 1997, alleging that
on September 16, 1997, she learned that she would be reassigned to
another institution. Informal efforts to resolve appellant's concerns
were unsuccessful.
On December 22, 1997, appellant filed a formal complaint alleging that
she was the victim of unlawful employment discrimination on the bases
of sex and reprisal. Appellant's complaint was comprised of the matter
for which she underwent EEO counseling, discussed above.
On April 10, 1998, the agency issued a final decision dismissing
appellant's complaint for failure to state a claim. Specifically, the
agency determined that appellant had not yet been reassigned nor had a
date been given for her reassignment. The agency found that appellant
had not been harmed as a result of any concrete agency action.
EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(a) 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 21, 1994).
Appellant contends that the agency engaged in discriminatory conduct when
on September 16, 1997, it informed her that she would be reassigned to
another institution. The record indicates that the agency considered
appellant for reassignment to alleviate personality conflicts within
her department. The record indicates further, however, that no such
reassignment has occurred. The agency indicates that it has taken
no action to reassign appellant and that there is no date pending for
such action. The agency asserts that appellant has not been harmed with
respect to a term, condition or privilege of her employment. On appeal,
appellant contends that the agency has engaged in harassing conduct by
advising her that she would be reassigned. Appellant alleges further
that the agency has created a hostile work environment which has caused
her to suffer medical and emotional problems.
Upon review, the Commission finds that appellant has failed to show
how she was aggrieved by the agency's conduct. Appellant has not been
reassigned, and her salary and duties have not been changed as a result
of the agency's purported conduct on September 16, 1997. In the absence
of evidence indicating that appellant has been harmed with respect to a
specific term condition or privilege of her employment, we must affirm
the agency's decision. Furthermore, appellant's complaint as well as her
assertions on appeal are insufficient to state a claim of harassment.
Accordingly, the agency's decision dismissing appellant's complaint for
failure to state a claim is hereby AFFIRMED for the reasons set forth
herein.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0795)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this
case if the appellant or the agency submits a written request containing
arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:
1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available
when the previous decision was issued; or
2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,
regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or
3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial
precedential implications.
Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST
BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this
decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive
a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in
opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider
MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party
WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request
to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.407. All requests and arguments
must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received
by the Commission.
Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your
request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances
have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,
a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the
delay and 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).
RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0993)
It is the position of the Commission that 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.
You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have
interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that
a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the
date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action
is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)
CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult
an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction
in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)
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:
10/21/1999
DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director
Office of Federal Operations