Joe Brown, Complainant,v.Hansford T. Johnson, Acting Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJun 30, 2003
01A21786 (E.E.O.C. Jun. 30, 2003)

01A21786

06-30-2003

Joe Brown, Complainant, v. Hansford T. Johnson, Acting Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.


Joe Brown v. Department of the Navy

01A21786

June 30, 2003

.

Joe Brown,

Complainant,

v.

Hansford T. Johnson,

Acting Secretary,

Department of the Navy,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A21786

Agency Nos. 98-63139-006 ["98-62593-006"];

and 99-63139-003

DECISION

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405, the Commission accepts the complainant's

appeal from the agency's final decision in the above-entitled matters.

This decision concerns two complaints<1>.

Complaint One was filed September 23, 1998. Complainant alleged that the

agency had discriminated against him on the bases of race (Caucasian),

sex (male), age (D.O.B. 6/23/43), and reprisal for prior EEO activity

and that the agency's actions contributed to a continuing hostile work

environment and disparate treatment when he was informed on August 27,

1998 that he was subjected to a reduction in force, when he learned on

August 4, 1998 that a miliary member was appointed the duties of METCAL

program manager, when he was denied overtime and on August 13, 1998,

when he learned that a military person attended a meeting in his former

commanding officer's office and discussed his EEO matters. By agency

letter dated January 28, 1999, the agency accepted for investigation his

claim that he was discriminated against when he was informed on August

27, 1998 that he was subjected to a reduction-in-force action. In this

appeal, the complainant is challenging the agency's dismissal of his

allegations that he was discriminated against when he learned on August

4, 1998 that his duties had been reassigned, denied overtime and that

a military person had discussed the particulars of his EEO cases.

In Complaint Two, filed on June 16, 1999, complainant alleged a pattern

of reprisal and harassment when he was constructively discharged,

denied time for a job search, denied time for EEO processing, assigned

to a small table, his informal complaint was not timely processed, he

received a decision from EEOC ordering the agency to comply, and he was

denied time to prepare an Office of Worker's Compensation claim.

With regard to his removal claims, we find the agency properly gave

complainant his right to appeal the RIF to the Merits Systems Protection

Board; and we note that the record reflects that he appealed to the

Board. On appeal to the EEOC, the complainant seeks administrative review

by this Commission of the agency's decisions regarding the non-removal

issues.

In accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(a), the decision on an appeal

from an agency's final action shall be based on de novo review by the

Commission.

After a review of the record in its entirety, including consideration

of all statements submitted on appeal, it is the decision of the

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to affirm the agency's final

decision. The preponderance of the evidence of record does not establish

that unlawful discrimination or reprisal occurred with regard to any of

the allegations regarding his duties, the table assignment and discussion

of his cases.<2> In addition, we affirm the agency's dismissal of the

rejected claims other than the removal claims, based on the untimeliness

of the complaint allegations, failure to state a claim and / or because

these matters state the same claim that has been decided by the agency

or this Commission or for which relief has been granted.

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

June 30, 2003

__________________

Date

1 For the purpose of clarity of the record, we note that this appeal

covers agency numbers 98-63139-006 and 99-63139-003. We also note that

agency number 98-63139-006 was initially referenced by the Commission

as 9862593006.

2 Complainant should have been provided with his appeal rights regarding

the agency's decision on Claim One. Since the complainant filed this

appeal, notwithstanding the absence of notice, complainant was not harmed

by the agency's oversight.