Jackie M. Linton, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 28, 2004
01A43490_r (E.E.O.C. Sep. 28, 2004)

01A43490_r

09-28-2004

Jackie M. Linton, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Jackie M. Linton v. United States Postal Service

01A43490

September 28, 2004

.

Jackie M. Linton,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A43490

Agency No. 1E-982-0034-03

DECISION

Complainant filed an appeal with this Commission from an April 9,

2004 agency decision, dismissing her complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �

1614.107(a)(1) for failure to state a claim.

In the October 10, 2003 complaint, complainant alleged that she was

discriminated against on the bases of race (Black), sex (female),

disability, age (D.O.B. November 29, 1957), and reprisal for prior EEO

activity when: (1) on an unspecified date, she was required to call the

Attendance Control Officer for sick leave and other employees were not;

(2) during July 2003, complainant was assigned a heavier workload

than others; (3) on July 14, 2003, complainant was subjected to an

investigative interview where she was charged with performance failure;

and (4) on July 30, 2003, complainant was threatened with termination

during a staff meeting. On December 9, 2003, the complaint was amended

to include a fifth issue: (5) whether complainant was discriminated

against when her job offer in the Western Area DNO was abolished and

she was given a new job offer.

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. See Diaz v. Department of the Air Force, EEOC Request

No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994). The complaint fails to state a claim

because complainant has not shown how she suffered a loss or harm as a

result of the agency's alleged actions. We note that the Commission has

held that being subjected to an agency investigation does not render an

individual aggrieved where complainant has not suffered an adverse action

as a result of the investigation. See Jones v. Department of the Army,

EEOC Request No. 05A00428 (March 1, 2002). Complainant has not shown that

she has suffered any adverse action as the result of the investigative

interview. Similarly, regarding the alleged threat, complainant has not

shown that the agency took any adverse action against her. The Commission

has consistently held that a remark or comment unaccompanied by concrete

action is not a direct and personal deprivation sufficient to render

an individual aggrieved. See Henry v. United States Postal Service,

EEOC Request No. 05940695 (February 9, 1995). The Commission also finds

that the alleged incidents, considered as a whole, were not sufficiently

severe or pervasive to state a claim of harassment as creating a hostile

work environment. See Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17,

21 (1993).

Accordingly, the agency's decision 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

September 28, 2004

__________________

Date