01a03538
02-15-2001
Marilyn A. Zemble, Complainant, v. Ann M. Veneman, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Agency.
Marilyn A. Zemble v. Department of Agriculture
01A03538
02-15-01
.
Marilyn A. Zemble,
Complainant,
v.
Ann M. Veneman,
Secretary,
Department of Agriculture,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A03538
Agency No. 98-0259
Hearing No. 170-99-8013X
DECISION
Complainant timely initiated an appeal from a final agency action
concerning her complaint of unlawful employment discrimination in
violation of Title VII.<1> The appeal is accepted pursuant to 29
C.F.R. � 1614.405.
ISSUES PRESENTED
The issues presented herein are whether the complainant has established
that the agency discriminated against her based on religion (Jewish)
and reprisal (prior EEO activity) when: (1) she was denied requested
training; and (2) she was allegedly harassed.
BACKGROUND
During the period in question, the complainant was employed as a
Purchasing Agent at the agency's facility in Moorestown, New Jersey.
The complainant filed a formal complaint in January 1998 in which
she raised the issues identified above. Following an investigation,
the complainant requested a hearing and the agency thereafter filed a
motion with the administrative judge (AJ) requesting the issuance of a
decision without a hearing. The AJ granted the motion and thereafter
issued a decision finding no discrimination. By final action dated
March 21, 2000, the agency implemented the AJ's decision. It is from
this decision that the complainant now appeals.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
Having carefully reviewed the record in its entirety, including
consideration of all statements submitted on appeal, it is the decision
of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to affirm the agency's
final action because the Administrative Judge's issuance of a decision
without a hearing was appropriate and a preponderance of the record
evidence does not establish that discrimination occurred. In reaching
these conclusions, the Commission notes that, regarding the first
issue raised by the complainant, the record reveals that most of her
requests for training were granted and that the courses she was denied
were not directly related to the duties of her position. With regard
to the second issue, i.e., that the complainant was allegedly harassed,
we agree with the AJ that the incidents challenged by the complainant
were not sufficiently severe or pervasive to establish discriminatory
harassment. See Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 21
(1993).<2>
CONCLUSION
Based on a review of the record and for the reasons cited above, it is
the decision of the Commission to AFFIRM the agency's final action and
find the complainant has not established that the agency discriminated
against her as alleged.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0300)
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 64
Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter referred
to as 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter
referred to as 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).
COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0400)
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
__02-15-01________________
Date
1 On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's
federal sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations
apply to all federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in
the administrative process. Consequently, the Commission will apply
the revised regulations found at 29 C.F.R. Part 1614, in deciding the
present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the
Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.
2We note that the case of Marilyn Zemble v. Department of Agriculture,
EEOC Appeal No. 01A03520 (September 22, 2000), Request No. 05A10070,
involved a claim of alleged harassment unrelated to those herein.