Michael S. Rozycki, Complainant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJul 27, 2000
01a03686 (E.E.O.C. Jul. 27, 2000)

01a03686

07-27-2000

Michael S. Rozycki, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Michael S. Rozycki v. United States Postal Service

01A03686

July 27, 2000

.

Michael S. Rozycki,

Complainant,

v.

William J. Henderson,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A03686

Agency No. 4G-770-0248-00

DECISION

On April 25, 2000, complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission

from a final agency decision (FAD), received by him on April 18, 2000,

pertaining to 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.<1> The Commission accepts this appeal in

accordance with 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified at

29 C.F.R. � 1614.405).

Complainant contacted the EEO office on February 15, 2000, regarding

claims of retaliation. Informal efforts to resolve his concerns were

unsuccessful. On March 14, 2000, complainant filed a formal complaint.

The agency framed the complaint as follows:

On February 8, 2000, complainant was discriminated against on the basis

of retaliation when his supervisor berated him in a meeting; pointed her

finger at complainant; commented that his asking for monetary demands

would cause the station to "make no profit" ; and accused complainant

of ruining the future of the Postal Service.

On April 12, 2000, the agency issued a FAD, dismissing the complaint

for failure to state a claim. Specifically, the agency found that the

remark raised in the complaint was a single incident, not accompanied

by a concrete effect, and therefore did not constitute a direct and

personal deprivation at the hands of the agency.

The regulation Set forth at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999)(to be

codified and hereinafter cited as 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. $3 16 14.103,

.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).

The Commission has held that a remark or comment, unaccompanied by

concrete action, is not a direct and personal deprivation sufficient

to render an individual aggrieved. See Fuller v. United States Postal

Service, EEOC Request No. 05910324 (May 2, 1991); Simon v. United States

Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05900866 (October 3, 1990). Complainant

has not demonstrated how the single, isolated incident in this complaint

has resulted in a harm or loss with respect to a term, condition, or

privilege of his employment. Moreover, a review of the record reflects

that the matter in question is insufficient to support a claim of

harassment. See Cobb v. Department of the Treasury, EEOC Request

No. 05970077 (March 13, 1997).

Accordingly, the agency's final decision dismissing complainant's

complaint is AFFIRMED.

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

July 27, 2000

__________________

Date

1On 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the

present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the

Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.