Michael E. Cooke, Appellant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 24, 1999
01990731 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 24, 1999)

01990731

08-24-1999

Michael E. Cooke, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Michael E. Cooke v. United States Postal Service

01990731

August 24, 1999

Michael E. Cooke, )

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01990731

) Agency No. 4D-400-1042-96

William J. Henderson, )

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, )

Agency. )

)

DECISION

Appellant filed an appeal with this Commission from a final decision of

the agency concerning his complaint of unlawful employment discrimination

in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,

42 U.S.C. �2000e et seq., Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of

1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �791 et seq., and the Age Discrimination in

Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �621 et seq. The final

agency decision was issued on September 24, 1998. The appeal was

postmarked November 2, 1998. Accordingly, the appeal is timely (see

29 C.F.R. �1614.402(a)), and is accepted in accordance with EEOC Order

No. 960, as amended.<1>

ISSUE PRESENTED

The issue on appeal is whether the agency properly dismissed appellant's

complaint on the grounds of failure to state a claim.

BACKGROUND

Appellant initiated contact with an EEO Counselor on March 8, 1996.

On June 7, 1997, appellant filed a formal EEO complaint wherein he alleged

that he was discriminated against on the bases of his sex (male), age

(48), physical disability (hip injury), and in reprisal for his previous

EEO activity when:

1. On February 21, 1996, he received a letter dated February 2, 1996,

from the State Union Steward stating his application for a local Steward

position could not be accepted.

2. In a letter dated February 5, 1996, from the State Union Steward,

it was stated that appellant's check for payment of union dues was lost

and not deposited.

3. The union did not process appellant's grievance dated January 18,

1996, to the Step 3 level.

4. On February 16, 1996, the agency denied appellant's Step 2 grievance,

thereby supporting the agency's decision not to allow appellant to work

more than eight hours in a limited duty assignment when the regular rural

carrier was off on vacation or sick time during the period of May 29,

1995 through January 17, 1996.

5. The agency and union failed to correct a personnel action, after

the Office of Workers' Compensation reversed their decision.

In its final decision, the agency dismissed appellant's complaint on

the grounds of failure to state a claim. The agency determined that

appellant failed to provide any evidence that he suffered a personal

loss or harm with respect to a term, condition, or privilege of his

employment as a result of the alleged actions. Further, the agency

stated that to the extent appellant's complaint is collateral to his

grievance, then it is not a matter for the Commission's intervention.

Thereafter, appellant filed the instant appeal.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(a) provides, in relevant part, that

an agency shall dismiss a complaint, or portion thereof, 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;

�1614.106(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).

Appellant alleged in allegations 1-3 of his complaint that he was

discriminated against when (1) his application for the local Union Steward

position was rejected by the State Union Steward; (2) he was advised by

the State Union Steward that his check for payment of his union dues was

allegedly lost and not deposited; and (3) the union did not process his

grievance dated January 18, 1996, to the Step 3 level. We find that

each of these allegations involve a claim that the union, and not the

agency, discriminated against appellant. Therefore, allegations 1-3

fail to state a claim as appellant has not been adversely affected by the

agency with regard to a term, condition, or privilege of his employment.

With regard to allegation 4, we find that this allegation also fails

to state a claim. Appellant is attempting to collaterally attack the

result of a Step 2 grievance decision. The Commission has held that

an employee cannot use the EEO complaint process to lodge a collateral

attack on another proceeding. Kleinman v. United States Postal Service,

EEOC Request No. 05940585 (September 22, 1994); Lingad v. United States

Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05930106 (June 24, 1993). Accordingly,

the agency's dismissal of allegations 1-4 of appellant's complaint on

the grounds of failure to state a claim was proper and is AFFIRMED.

With regard to allegation 5, we note that appellant is alleging that

the agency and the union failed to correct a personnel action after the

Office of Workers' Compensation reversed their decision. The portion

of the allegation that alleges discrimination by the union was properly

dismissed because it does not claim that the agency caused appellant

to suffer harm with regard to a term, condition, or privilege of his

employment. However, with regard to that portion of the allegation

claiming discrimination by the agency, we are unable to determine the

exact nature of the personnel action at issue. Therefore, we find that

the issue must be clarified. Accordingly, the agency's decision to

dismiss allegation 5 of appellant's complaint on the grounds of failure

to state a claim is AFFIRMED insofar as the allegation pertains to the

union, but is VACATED as to that portion of the allegation that claims

discrimination by the agency. This portion of allegation 5 is REMANDED

for further processing in accordance with the Order below.

ORDER

The agency is ORDERED to take the following actions:

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

send appellant a written request to clarify allegation 5 as it relates to

the agency's alleged failure to correct a personnel action. Specifically,

appellant shall be requested to identify the precise personnel action in

question, the date of incident, the officials involved, and any other

relevant information regarding this allegations. Appellant shall be

given fifteen (15) calendar days from the date of receipt of the agency's

request within which to respond.

Thereafter, the agency shall issue a notice of processing or final agency

decision with appropriate appeal rights with regard to the remanded

portion of allegation 5 within thirty (30) calendar days of its receipt

of appellant's response.

A copy of the agency's letter seeking clarification of the remanded

portion of allegation 5 and the notice of processing or final agency

decision must be sent to the Compliance Officer as referenced below.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0595)

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 appellant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's

order, the appellant may petition the Commission for enforcement of

the order. 29 C.F.R. �1614.503 (a). The appellant 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. �� 1614.408, 1614.409, and 1614.503 (g). Alternatively,

the appellant 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. �� 1614.408 and 1614.409. 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) (Supp. V 1993). If the

appellant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the

complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated.

See 29 C.F.R. �1614.410.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0795)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the appellant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available

when the previous decision was issued; or

2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,

regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or

3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial

precedential implications.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST

BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this

decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive

a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in

opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider

MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party

WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request

to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.407. All requests and arguments

must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received

by the Commission.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances

have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,

a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the

delay and 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).

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (T0993)

This decision affirms the agency's final decision in part, but it also

requires the agency to continue its administrative processing of a

portion of your complaint. You have the right to file a civil action

in an appropriate United States District Court on both that portion of

your complaint which the Commission has affirmed AND that portion of the

complaint which has been remanded for continued administrative processing.

It is the position of the Commission that 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.

You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have

interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that

a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the

date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action

is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)

CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult

an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction

in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)

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:

August 24, 1999

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations

1The record does not establish when appellant received the final agency

decision. Absent evidence to the contrary, we find that the instant

appeal was timely filed.