Martin G. Spinelli, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 28, 2005
01a41701 (E.E.O.C. Sep. 28, 2005)

01a41701

09-28-2005

Martin G. Spinelli, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Martin G. Spinelli v. United States Postal Service

01A41701

September 28, 2005

.

Martin G. Spinelli,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A41701

Agency No.4A-110-0087-02

Hearing No. 160-2003-8538X

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from an agency

final action, dated December 5, 2003, regarding his formal EEO complaint

of unlawful employment discrimination in violation of Section 501 of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. �

791 et seq. The Commission accepts the appeal in accordance with 29

C.F.R. � 1614.405.

On July 12, 2002, complainant filed the instant formal complaint.

Therein, complainant claimed that he was subjected to unlawful employment

discrimination on the basis of disability when effective May 4, 2002,

the work schedule for his limited duty job assignment was changed from

0630-1500 to 0800-1630.

On December 24, 2002, the agency issued a final decision dismissing the

complaint for failure to state a claim. The agency reasoned that the

claim was an impermissible collateral attack on the Office of Workers'

Compensation Programs (OWCP) forum.

On appeal, the Commission determined that �the matter raised in the

instant complaint is separate from complainant's OWCP claim, and is

within the purview of EEOC Regulations.� The Commission reversed

the agency decision to dismiss the instant complaint and remanded the

complaint to the agency for further processing. Spinelli v. USPS,

EEOC Appeal No. 01A31429 (April 17, 2003).

At the conclusion of the investigation, complainant received a copy of the

investigative report and requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative

Judge (AJ). On December 2, 2003, the AJ issued a decision without a

hearing, dismissing the complaint for failure to state a claim.

The AJ found that �the evidence indicates that the complainant's

claim, his challenge of the Agency's changing of his work hours for

his limited duty assignment, is dismissible as a collateral attack on

the determination by the [OWCP] . . . .� According to the AJ, when an

employer finds a limited duty job that it believes meets the medical

restrictions of an employee, the OWCP makes the final determination as

to whether the job is appropriate. The AJ noted that the complainant

did not challenge the agency's assertion that he was working within

OWCP-approved duties. Therefore, the AJ concluded that �[c]omplainant is

not alleging that the agency discriminated against him by assigning him to

a position outside the accepted OWCP medical restrictions, but rather that

the OWCP-approved restrictions are incorrect and in need of revision.�

On December 5, 2003, the agency issued a final action implementing the

AJ's decision to dismiss the complaint.

The Commission has held that an employee cannot use the EEO complaint

process to lodge a collateral attack on another proceeding. See Wills

v. Department of Defense, EEOC Request No. 05970596 (July 30, 1998);

Kleinman v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05940585

(September 22, 1994); Lingad v. United States Postal Service, EEOC

Request No. 05930106 (June 25, 1993).

In the instant case, however, complainant clearly and repeatedly claims

that he was discriminated against when his duty hours were changed from

0630 to 1500, to 0800-1630 in violation of his doctor's restrictions.

The EEO Counselor's Report and pre-complaint documentation do not contain

any reference to a determination by the OWCP. As stated in our prior

decision, we find that complainant has alleged a personal harm or loss

to a term, condition or privilege of his employment.

Accordingly, the agency's final action, implementing the AJ's dismissal

of the instant complaint for failure to state a claim is REVERSED.

The complaint is REMANDED to the agency for further processing in

accordance with this decision and the Order below.

ORDER

The agency shall submit to the Hearings Unit of the EEOC New York

District Office a request for a hearing within fifteen (15) calendar

days of the date this decision becomes final. The agency is directed

to submit a copy of the complaint file to the EEOC Hearings Unit within

fifteen (15) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final.

The agency shall provide written notifications to the Compliance Officer

at the address set forth below that the request and complaint file have

been transmitted to the Hearings Unit.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0501)

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 (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 (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

September 28, 2005

__________________

Date