Inez L. Burrows, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJul 29, 2003
01A32256_r (E.E.O.C. Jul. 29, 2003)

01A32256_r

07-29-2003

Inez L. Burrows, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Inez L. Burrows v. United States Postal Service

01A32256

July 29, 2003

.

Inez L. Burrows,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A32256

Agency No. 4-H-330-0133-02

DECISION

Upon review, the Commission finds that complainant's complaint was

properly dismissed pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(2), for untimely

EEO Counselor contact. In her complaint, complainant alleged that

she was subjected to discrimination on the bases of national origin

(African-American) and sex (female) when, on November 20, 2001, she

became aware that she was issued a Notice of Removal dated September 1,

2000, for Improper Disposition of Mail.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105(a)(1) requires complaints of

discrimination to be brought to the attention of the EEO Counselor within

forty-five (45) days of the date of the claimed discriminatory matter,

or, in the case of a personnel action, within forty-five (45) days of

the effective date of the action. The Commission's regulations, however,

provide that the time limit will be extended when the complainant shows

that he or she was not notified of the time limits and was not otherwise

aware of them, that he or she did not know and reasonably should not

have known that the discriminatory matter or personnel action occurred,

that despite due diligence he or she was prevented by circumstances

beyond his or her control from contacting the counselor within the time

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

Commission. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105(a)(2).

The record discloses that the alleged discriminatory event occurred when

a Notice of Removal was issued to her for Improper Disposition of Mail

in September 2000. Complainant's removal was effective end of tour of

duty on December 11, 2000. The notice was delivered via certified and

regular (ordinary) mail. Certification of delivery reflects delivery

was made on September 5, 2000. Whereas the complainant refused to

"claim" the certified delivery, the regular mail delivery was left as

other mail and did not require her signature.<1> On appeal, complainant

states that, on November 20, 2001, she became aware that she was issued

a Notice of Removal dated September 1, 2000, for Improper Disposition

of Mail. Complainant said that she was incarcerated and that she never

actually received the Notice of Removal. However, the record reveals

that complainant appealed the removal notice via her Letter Carrier

craft through a grievance procedure on September 28, 2000. Complainant

thereafter initiated contact with an EEO Counselor on December 28, 2001.

The Commission finds that complainant should have reasonably suspected

discrimination by September 28, 2000, the date that complainant appealed

the removal notice through a grievance procedure. Complainant did

not initiate contact with an EEO Counselor until December 28, 2001,

which is beyond the forty-five (45) day limitation period. On appeal,

complainant has presented no persuasive arguments or evidence warranting

an extension of the time limit for initiating EEO Counselor contact.

Accordingly, the agency's final decision dismissing complainant's

complaint is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0701)

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 (S0900)

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 (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:

______________________________

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

July 29, 2003

__________________

Date

1"Unclaimed" mail annotation means the address is correct; however,

addressee ignored the several notices to claim the mail piece.