Kenneth D. Cooprider, Complainant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMar 28, 2001
01A04059 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 28, 2001)

01A04059

03-28-2001

Kenneth D. Cooprider, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Kenneth D. Cooprider v. United States Postal Service

01A04059

March 28, 2001

.

Kenneth D. Cooprider,

Complainant,

v.

William J. Henderson,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A04059

Agency No. 4H-320-0091-00

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from an agency

decision dated April 12, 2000, 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. and Section

501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended,

29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq. In his complaint, complainant alleged that he

was subjected to discrimination on the bases of sex (male) and disability

(carpal tunnel syndrome) when:

Complainant's claim for workers' compensation benefits was challenged.

The agency dismissed complainant's complaint pursuant to the regulation

set forth at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1), for failure to state a claim.

The agency stated that complainant failed to identify a harm to a term,

condition, or privilege of employment. In addition, the agency stated

that it is an agency's obligation to controvert an employee's workers'

compensation claim where there is a dispute as to the employee's

entitlement. The agency claimed that complainant's claim was challenged

because the CA-2 form was submitted with no medical documentation.

On appeal, complainant states that of the four claims for carpal

tunnel syndrome by rural carriers of the Homosassa Springs Post Office,

three were filed by female carriers and one was filed by complainant,

a male carrier. Complainant states that only his claim was challenged

by the agency's Office of Injury Compensation and argues that his claim

was challenged because of his sex.

The regulation set forth at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) provides, in

relevant part, that an agency shall dismiss a complaint 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,

.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).

The Commission has found that a complainant may not use the EEO process

to launch a collateral attack on the workers' compensation process.

See Story v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05960314

(October 18, 1996). Additionally, the Commission has recognized that the

agency has the right to represent its position and interest in the OWCP

Forum, and will not review decisions which would require it to judge the

merits of a workers' compensation claim. See Hogan v. Department of the

Army, EEOC Request No. 05940407 (September 29, 1994). However, where

a complainant alleges that the agency discriminated in the processing

of a workers' compensation claim -- for example, by failing to submit

required paperwork -- then the claim states an EEO complaint. See Foster

v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01951370 (May 8, 1995),

req. to recon. den., EEOC Request No. 05950693, (May 16, 1996).

In the present case, complainant alleged disparate treatment with respect

to the agency's controversion of workers' compensation claims, i.e.,

that the agency controverts the claims of male employees but not those

of female employees. The Commission finds that complainant has stated a

claim under the regulations. See Conley v. Department of the Navy, EEOC

Request No. 05970402 (February 11, 1999) (Commission found complainant

stated a claim where he alleged that the agency controverted the workers'

compensation claims of black employees but not those of white employees).

Accordingly, the agency's decision was improper and is REVERSED and

the case is REMANDED for further processing in accordance with the

Order below.

ORDER (E0900)

The agency is ordered to process the remanded claims in accordance with

29 C.F.R. � 1614.108. 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 (K0900)

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 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. 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)(Supp. V 1993). 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 (M0900)

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 (R0900)

This is a decision requiring the agency to continue its administrative

processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil

action, you have the right to file such action in an appropriate United

States District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date

that you receive this decision. 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 (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

March 28, 2001

__________________

Date