Kenneth Holmes, Complainant,v.Dr. James B. Peake, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 29, 2008
0120082790 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 29, 2008)

0120082790

09-29-2008

Kenneth Holmes, Complainant, v. Dr. James B. Peake, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.


Kenneth Holmes,

Complainant,

v.

Dr. James B. Peake,

Secretary,

Department of Veterans Affairs,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120082790

Agency No. 200J05532004103600

DECISION

On June 3, 2008, complainant filed an appeal from the agency's May 6,

2008 final decision concerning his compensatory damages award regarding

an equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint alleging 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. The appeal is deemed

timely and is accepted pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(a). For the

following reasons, the Commission modifies the agency's final decision.

BACKGROUND

At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, complainant worked

as a part-time Housekeeping Aide at the agency's Medical Center facility

in Detroit, Michigan. On August 23, 2004, complainant filed an EEO

complaint alleging that he was subjected to sexual harassment by his

first level supervisor (S1). On June 21, 2005, the agency issued a

final decision finding no discrimination. In its decision, the agency

acknowledged that the sexual harassment occurred, but concluded that

no liability could be imposed because agency management took prompt

remedial action when complainant reported the harassment. Complainant

timely appealed the agency's final decision, and in our decision in

Holmes v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 0120055036

(November 9, 2007), the Commission reversed the agency's final decision.

We found that complainant was subjected to unlawful harassment in that

the actions alleged were sufficiently severe to create an intimidating,

hostile, and offensive work environment. We further found that the

agency was liable for the harassment. Specifically, we found that when

complainant reported the harassment to agency management, he was subjected

to an involuntary schedule change which further adversely affected his

employment. Our decision ordered the agency to take various remedial

actions, including the calculation of compensatory damages.

On May 6, 2008, the agency issued a final decision on complainant's

claim for compensatory damages. The agency found that, based on

the documentation submitted by complainant in support of his claim,

complainant was entitled to non-pecuniary damages in the amount of

$18,500.00. It is from this decision that complainant brings the

instant appeal. On appeal, complainant contends that the agency's

award is insufficient, and requests compensatory damages in the amount

of $300,000.00.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Pursuant to section 102(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, a

complainant who establishes his or her claim of unlawful discrimination

may receive, in addition to equitable remedies, compensatory damages

for past and future pecuniary losses ( i.e., out of pocket expenses)

and non-pecuniary losses (e.g., pain and suffering, mental anguish). 42

U.S. C. � 1981a(b)(3). For an employer with more than 500 employees,

such as the agency, the limit of liability for future pecuniary and

non-pecuniary damages is $300,000.00. Id.

The particulars of what relief may be awarded, and what proof is necessary

to obtain that relief, are set forth in detail in EEOC Notice No. 915.002,

Compensatory and Punitive Damages Available Under Section 102 of the Civil

Rights Act of 1991 (July 14, 1992). Briefly stated, the complainant must

submit evidence to show that the agency's discriminatory conduct directly

or proximately caused the losses for which damages are sought. Id. at

11-12, 14; Rivera v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 01934157

(July 22, 1994). The amount awarded should reflect the extent to which

the agency's discriminatory action directly or proximately caused harm

to the complainant and the extent to which other factors may have played

a part. EEOC Notice No. N 915.002 at 11-12. The amount of non-pecuniary

damages should also reflect the nature and severity of the harm to the

complainant, and the duration or expected duration of the harm. Id. at

14.

In Carle v. Department of the Navy, the Commission explained that

"objective evidence" of non-pecuniary damages could include a

statement by the complainant explaining how he or she was affected

by the discrimination. EEOC Appeal No. 01922369 (January 5, 1993).

Statements from others, including family members, friends, and health

care providers could address the outward manifestations of the impact

of the discrimination on the complainant. Id. The complainant could

also submit documentation of medical or psychiatric treatment related

to the effects of the discrimination. Id. Non-pecuniary damages must

be limited to the sums necessary to compensate the injured party for the

actual harm and should take into account the severity of the harm and the

length of the time the injured party has suffered from the harm. Carpenter

v. Department of Agriculture, EEOC Appeal No. 01945652 (July 17, 1995).

Here, we find that the record clearly shows that complainant suffered

severe emotional distress as a result of the harassment, for a period

beginning in 2004, and continuing to the present. In support of his

claim for compensatory damages, complainant presented evidence that he

suffered depression, sleeplessness, anxiety, irritability, problems with

concentration, loss of self-esteem, and humiliation. Complainant states

that as a result of the harassment he began smoking a pack of cigarettes

per day and his alcohol consumption increased significantly. He states

that every night he "would come home and sit in the house and close

the blinds and drink." Complainant states that his relationships with

co-workers deteriorated, and that "every day [he goes] to work...people

look at [him] and basically harass [him], taunt [him], question [his]

sexuality and [his] sexual preference." Complainant also states that

his long-term relationship with his girlfriend ended as a result of the

harassment, and that many of his friends told him that he "should have

slept with" S1 and that he probably could have "gotten a full-time job

out of the thing." Complainant states that this has caused him to become

"a loner" because he no longer trusts anyone. (Report of Investigation,

Exhibit 4).

The record also contains affidavit testimony from one of complainant's

co-workers (CW), and the individual from whom he sought counseling and

guidance (SW), which corroborate many of complainant's contentions.

In his affidavit, CW stated that over a period of 3-4 years, as a result

of the harassment, complainant went from "kind-hearted" and "benevolent"

to "hostile" and "untrusting." CW also stated that complainant withdrew

from social interaction and "began to act as a hermit." (R.O.I.,

Exhibit 7). SW, who holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Behavioral and

Social Sciences, stated that complainant "began to alienate himself" and

sought "refuge in excessive drinking and smoking, therefore altering his

general physical appearance with a weight increase of 30 lbs." (R.O.I.,

Exhibit 6). We note, however, that the record shows that during the

period at issue, complainant was suffering financial difficulties as a

result of having been laid off from his full-time job due to a facility

closure, and that this was a contributing factor in the emotional harm

to complainant. (R.O.I, Exhibit 4).

Here, taking into account the evidence of non-pecuniary damages

submitted by complainant, the Commission finds that he is entitled

to non-pecuniary damages in the amount of $65,000.00. See Hibbert

v. Department of Justice, EEOC Appeal No. 0720070036 (October 25, 2007)

($60,000.00 award for non-pecuniary damages where the agency subjected

complainant to racial harassment that resulted in stress, frustration,

humiliation, and loss of self esteem); Viers v. U.S. Postal Service,

EEOC Appeal No. 01A14246 (June 20, 2002) ($65,000.00 in non-pecuniary

damages where the complainant stated that she suffered fatigue,

insomnia, marital strain, anxiety, loss of self esteem, depression, and

withdrawal due to harassment); Brown v. Department of Justice, EEOC Appeal

No. 01983712 (June 22, 2000) ($75,000.00 in non-pecuniary damages where

discrimination caused sleeplessness, insomnia, argumentative behavior,

depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, and increased irritability). Our

determination considers the emotional and physical symptoms described by

complainant, the corroborating testimony from CW and SW, the duration of

the harm, as well as the contributing factor of complainant's financial

difficulties. We further find that this award is not motivated by

passion or prejudice, is not monstrously excessive, and is consistent

with Commission precedent. See Cygnar v. City of Chicago, 865 F.2d 827,

848 (7th Cir. 1989); EEOC v. AIC Security Investigations, Ltd., 823

F. Supp. 571, 574 (N.D. Ill. 1993).

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, the agency's decision is modified and remanded for further

processing in accordance with this decision and the Order below.

ORDER

The agency is ordered to take the following remedial action:

Within sixty (60) days of the date this decision becomes final, the agency

shall pay complainant $65,000.00 in non-pecuniary compensatory damages.

The agency is further directed to submit a report of compliance, as

provided in the statement entitled "Implementation of the Commission's

Decision." The report shall include supporting documentation verifying

that the corrective action has been implemented.

ATTORNEY'S FEES (H0900)

If complainant has been represented by an attorney (as defined by

29 C.F.R. � 1614.501(e)(1)(iii)), he/she is entitled to an award of

reasonable attorney's fees incurred in the processing of the complaint.

29 C.F.R. � 1614.501(e). The award of attorney's fees shall be paid

by the agency. The attorney shall submit a verified statement of fees

to the agency -- not to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,

Office of Federal Operations -- within thirty (30) calendar days of this

decision becoming final. The agency shall then process the claim for

attorney's fees in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.501.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0408)

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)

(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 (M0408)

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 (S0408)

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 (Z0408)

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 29, 2008

__________________

Date

2

0120082790

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

6

0120082790