Kenneth W. Meadors, II, Complainant,v.R.L. Brownlee, Acting Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 30, 2003
01A34238_r (E.E.O.C. Sep. 30, 2003)

01A34238_r

09-30-2003

Kenneth W. Meadors, II, Complainant, v. R.L. Brownlee, Acting Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.


Kenneth W. Meadors, II v. Department of the Army

01A34238

September 30, 2003

.

Kenneth W. Meadors, II,

Complainant,

v.

R.L. Brownlee,

Acting Secretary,

Department of the Army,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A34238

Agency No. ARMCCOY03MAY0038

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the final

agency decision dated June 2, 2003, 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.

On April 21, 2003, complainant initiated contact with an EEO

Counselor. Informal efforts to resolve his concerns were unsuccessful.

In his formal complaint, filed on May 19, 2003, complainant alleged that

he was subjected to discrimination on the basis of sex when on February 2,

2001, he was terminated during the probationary period of his employment

as a Police Officer, GS-0083-06.

The agency dismissed complainant's complaint on the grounds of

raising the same matters that were brought in a negotiated grievance

procedure that permits claims of discrimination, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �

1614.107(a)(4). The agency also dismissed complainant's complaint on

the alternative grounds of untimely Counselor contact, pursuant to 29

C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(2).

The Commission itself has adopted a "reasonable suspicion" standard

(as opposed to a "supportive

facts" standard) to determine when the 45-day limitation period is

triggered. See Howard v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Request No. 05970852

(February 11, 1999). Thus, the time limitation is not triggered until

a complainant reasonably suspects discrimination, but before all the

facts that support a charge of discrimination become apparent.

In his formal complaint, complainant alleged that on February 2,

2001, he was terminated from his position of Police Officer based on

allegations of sexual harassment of two of his co-workers. The Commission

has consistently held that a complainant must act with due diligence in

the pursuit of his claim or the doctrine of laches may apply. See O'Dell

v. Department of Health and Human Services, EEOC Request No. 05901130

(December 27, 1990). The doctrine of laches is an equitable remedy

under which an individual's failure to pursue diligently his course of

action could bar his claim. Complainant waited over two years before

he finally contacted an EEO Counselor. Complainant failed to present

adequate justification pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105(a)(2), for

extending the limitation period beyond forty-five days. Accordingly,

the agency's final decision dismissing the complaint is hereby AFFIRMED.

Because we affirm the dismissal of the instant complaint for the reason

stated herein, we find it

unnecessary to address the agency's alternative dismissal grounds.

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 30, 2003

__________________

Date