Mary J. Johnson, Complainant,v.Thomas J. Ridge, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJun 15, 2004
01A33870_r (E.E.O.C. Jun. 15, 2004)

01A33870_r

06-15-2004

Mary J. Johnson, Complainant, v. Thomas J. Ridge, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, Agency.


Mary J. Johnson v. Department of Homeland Security

01A33870

June 15, 2004

.

Mary J. Johnson,

Complainant,

v.

Thomas J. Ridge,

Secretary,

Department of Homeland Security,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A33870

Agency No. 7-03-6043

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from an agency

decision, dated May 16, 2003, pertaining to her complaint of unlawful

employment discrimination in violation of the Age Discrimination in

Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq.

The Commission accepts the appeal in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.

On November 20, 2002, complainant contacted the EEO office claiming

that she was discriminated against when on March 22, 2002, she was not

selected for a SWAT Security Screener position. Informal efforts to

resolve complainant's concerns were unsuccessful. On January 29, 2003,

complainant filed a formal complaint based on age.

On May 16, 2003, the agency issued a final decision dismissing the

complaint on the grounds of untimely Counselor contact. The agency

found that complainant contacted the EEO office on November 20, 2002,

243 days after learning of her non-selection. Further, the agency noted

that complainant explained to the EEO Counselor that she reapplied and was

informed on August 27, 2002 that she could not retake the test because

there were no available positions. The agency determined that this

subsequent event was still 85 days before her November 2002 EEO contact.

On appeal, complainant states that on March 22, 2002, she was told she did

not pass the test, but could retest in six months. Complainant contends

that on October 11, 2002, she was told that she could not retest.

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 (45) days of the date of the

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

action, within forty-five (45) days of the effective date of the action.

The Commission has adopted a "reasonable suspicion" standard (as opposed

to a "supportive facts" standard) to determine when the forty-five (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 have

become apparent.

EEOC Regulations provide that the agency or the Commission shall extend

the time limits when the individual shows that she was not notified of the

time limits and was not otherwise aware of them, that she did not know

and reasonably should not have known that the discriminatory matter or

personnel action occurred, that despite due diligence she was prevented

by circumstances beyond her control from contacting the Counselor within

the time limits, or for other reasons considered sufficient by the agency

or the Commission.

Complainant learned on March 22, 2002, that she was not selected

for the Security Screener position. We determine that her November

20, 2002 contact was well beyond the forty-five-day time limitation.

Complainant has not provided sufficient justification for extending or

tolling the time limit.

Accordingly, the agency's decision to dismiss the complaint was proper

and is AFFIRMED.

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

June 15, 2004

__________________

Date