Lucille E. Jaramillo, Complainant,v.Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary, Department of Defense, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionOct 22, 2002
01A22861_r (E.E.O.C. Oct. 22, 2002)

01A22861_r

10-22-2002

Lucille E. Jaramillo, Complainant, v. Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary, Department of Defense, Agency.


Lucille E. Jaramillo v. Department of Defense

01A22861

October 22, 2002

.

Lucille E. Jaramillo,

Complainant,

v.

Donald H. Rumsfeld,

Secretary,

Department of Defense,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A22861

Agency No. HPOFO1074

DECISION

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

decision dated March 6, 2002, dismissing her 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. In her

complaint, complainant alleged that she was subjected to discrimination

on the bases of national origin (Hispanic) and in reprisal for prior

EEO activity when:

a) On or about January 3, 2001, complainant's supervisor (S1) failed

to re-schedule complainant for training;

b) On or about November 27, 2000, S1 canceled complainant's scheduled

training;

c) On or about November 14, 2000, management (S2) forwarded an electronic

mail message to complainant stating, "it was non-productive to inform him

of a co-worker's (C1's) sins," after complainant had initially sent S2

and S3, an electronic mail message informing them of abuse issues with C1;

d) On or about November 13, 2000, S2 and C1 laughed at complainant while

discussing that S3's computer had been down during the time complainant

sent the electronic mail message informing them of abuses by C1;

e) On or about November 6, 2000, management (S1 and S3) did not select

complainant for a promotion to a Lead Communications Computer Specialist,

GS-334-11 position;

f) On or about November 6, 2000, S1 informed complainant that feedback

received from C1 on complainant's "poor" performance led to her

non-selection for the above position;

g) On or about September 8, 2000, management (S1 and S3) failed

to interview complainant and failed to inform complainant of her

non-selection in accordance with policy; and failed to give complainant

proper consideration for a GS-334-11 Lead Communications Computer

Specialist position;

h) On or about July 20, 2000, complainant's supervisor (S1) yelled and

screamed at her on the phone in front of complainant's co-workers when

complainant called to request annual leave;

On an unspecified date, S1 told complainant "I had a Mexican friend

that was convinced that she was beautiful and she was really ugly and

you both looked like sisters;" and

j) On an unspecified date, S1 belittled other Hispanics within the

organization by talking down to them in front of their peers.

By letter to complainant dated October 18, 2001, the agency accepted only

claims (a) and (b) for investigation. Subsequently, the parties entered

into a settlement agreement, dated February 26, 2002, in which complainant

agreed to withdraw claims (a) and (b). Thereafter, the agency issued

its final decision in which the agency dismissed the remaining claims

(claims (c) - (j)). The agency dismissed claims (c) - (i) pursuant to 29

C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(2), finding that complainant failed to initiate EEO

Counselor contact within 45 days of the alleged discriminatory events.

The agency also dismissed claims (c), (d), (f), (g), and (j) pursuant

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

On appeal, complainant argues that her complaint states an overall

claim of harassment beginning approximately from the time S1 became

complainant's immediate supervisor through the time she contacted the

EEO Counselor.

Claims (c) - (i)

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105(a)(1) requires that complaints

of discrimination should be brought to the attention of the Equal

Employment Opportunity Counselor within forty-five days of the date of

the matter alleged to be discriminatory or, in the case of a personnel

action, within forty-five days of the effective date of the action.

Complainant initiated EEO counseling on January 9, 2001, which is beyond

the 45-day limit for initial EEO contact regarding claims (c) - (i).

Dismissal of claims (c) - (i) pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(2)

for untimely EEO Counselor contact is therefore proper.

Claim (j)

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).

We concur with the agency that claim (j) fails to state a claim. We find

complainant has not shown any loss, harm or adverse employment action

resulting from the alleged discrimination described. Moreover, even

when considered togther with the other alleged incidents of harassment

in the complaint, we find S1's alleged "talking down" to employees of

Hispanic ethnicity neither sufficiently severe or pervasive to state

a claim of harassment. We find dismissal of claim (j) pursuant to 29

C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) for failure to state a claim is proper.

We therefore AFFIRM the agency's dismissal of the complaint.

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

October 22, 2002

__________________

Date