John Briggs, Complainant,v.Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionOct 24, 2011
0120112936 (E.E.O.C. Oct. 24, 2011)

0120112936

10-24-2011

John Briggs, Complainant, v. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.




John Briggs,

Complainant,

v.

Eric K. Shinseki,

Secretary,

Department of Veterans Affairs,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120112936

Agency No. 200305202010104702

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the Agency's

decision dated April 22, 2011, dismissing his complaint of 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 Medical Support Assistant at the Agency’s facility in Biloxi,

Mississippi.

On February 2, 2011, Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint alleging

that the Agency subjected him to discriminatory harassment on the bases

of his religion (Muslim), as well as retaliation for prior protected

EEO activity, when:

1. on April 29, 2010, the Complainant’s work computer was confiscated

and an investigation initiated for alleged privacy violations;

2. on May 5, 2010, the Complainant was accused of misusing government

equipment; and

3. on July 23, 2010, the Complainant’s request to return his documents

from the confiscated hard drive was denied.

Complainant first contacted an EEO counselor on April 29 2010, concerning

the confiscation of his computer and related investigation (allegation

1). During the course of the counseling, he also raised the May 2010

accusation that he misused government equipment (allegation 2). Following

counseling, Complainant was issued a notice of right to file a formal EEO

complaint, but did not do so. Instead, the record contains a withdrawal

form dated August 19, 2010, withdrawing this matter from the EEO process.

On September 1, 2010, Complainant again initiated contact with an EEO

counselor and raised the allegation concerning his July request for the

return of his confiscated documents (allegation 3). In November 2010,

he opted to participate in mediation of this claim. Information in

the file indicates that there was a “verbal agreement” between

Complainant and “the Director” in which Complainant agreed to

withdraw his complaint. It is unclear exactly what the terms of the

agreement were, but Complainant signed a withdrawal of his complaint

form on November 3, 2010. Nonetheless, the Agency sent him a notice

of right to file a formal complaint, which he received on December 2,

2010.1 Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint on February 2, 2011.

The Agency dismissed the complaint based on the withdrawal forms signed

during the counseling stage. In the alternative, the Agency asserted

the entire matter should be dismissed for failure to file a timely

formal complaint. The instant appeal followed.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Dismissal Based on Withdrawal Forms

The record clearly establishes that in August 2010, Complainant clearly

and unequivocally withdrew his EEO claims concerning the matters raised

in allegations 1 and 2. Therefore, the Agency’s dismissal of these

allegations, to the extent they were raised in his February 2011 complaint

as any more than background evidence, was correct.

With regard to allegation 3, the Agency does not dispute Complainant’s

contention that in November 2010 there was a “verbal” settlement

of his claim following mediation which led Complainant to signing a

withdrawal form on November 3, 2010. No terms of this agreement are

contained in the record. EEOC regulations require that all settlements be

in writing and signed by both parties and identify the claims resolved. 29

C.F.R. § 1614.603. As such, under the facts as presented in this case,

any verbal agreement which required Complainant to withdraw his claim will

not be enforced and Complainant will not be bound by the December 2010

withdrawal resulting from that agreement. Accordingly, the Agency’s

dismissal of allegation 3 based on the withdrawal of that allegation

is reversed.

Dismissal Based on Untimely Filing of Complaint

The regulation set forth at 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(2) states, in

pertinent part, that an agency shall dismiss a complaint which fails

to comply with the applicable time limits contained in 29 C.F.R. §

1614.106(b) which, in turn, requires the filing of a formal complaint

within fifteen (15) days of receiving the notice of the right to do so.

In the instant case, it is undisputed that Complainant received the notice

of right to file concerning allegation 3 on December 2, 2010, but did

not file his formal complaint until February 2, 2011, well beyond the

fifteen-day limitation period. Moreover, an examination of the notice

reveals that it properly advised Complainant of the filing deadline.

Based on these facts, the Agency dismissed the complaint as untimely

filed.

Complainant, however, argues that as part of the “verbal agreement”

resulting from the mediation, he expected to receive a copy of an

inspection report into his computer use.2 Once Complainant received

the report, he promptly filed his formal complaint, albeit after the

fifteen-day limitation period. While not altogether clear, it appears

that Complainant is asserting that he was entitled, under the terms of the

verbal agreement, to hold off filing until he received the report. As the

agreement was never reduced to writing, we have no way of determining

whether there is support for this assertion. This illustrates the reason

for the Commission’s regulation requiring that agreements settling EEO

complaints be in writing. Due to the confusion in this matter caused

by the verbal settlement, we cannot affirm the Agency’s dismissal of

allegation 3 for untimely filing of the complaint.

Accordingly, the Agency’s dismissal of allegations 1 and 2 is AFFIRMED,

and the dismissal of allegation 3 is REVERSED and this part of the

complaint is REMANDED to the Agency for further processing in accordance

with the following Order.

ORDER (E0610)

The Agency is ordered to process the remanded claim (allegation 3

concerning the failure to return Complainant’s computer files)

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 becomes final.

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 becomes

final, 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.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0610)

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), at 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

77960, Washington, DC 20013. 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 (T0610)

This decision affirms the Agency’s final decision/action in part, but it

also requires the Agency to continue its administrative processing of a

portion of your complaint. 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 on both that portion of

your complaint which the Commission has affirmed and that portion of the

complaint which has been remanded for continued administrative processing.

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 your appeal with the Commission, until such time as the Agency

issues its final decision on your complaint. 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 (Z0610)

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 from the Court that

the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also

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 with

the Court 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

October 24, 2011

__________________

Date

1 The Agency now claims that the notice of right to file was sent due

to an administrative error.

2 The report indicates that someone reported that Complainant was writing

a book on his work place computer during working hours. A manuscript of

a recently published book was found on his computer. Numerous findings

were made regarding Complainant’s computer use and he was provided a

replacement computer to perform his assigned duties.

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

2

0120112936

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

2

0120112936