Pegah Bazeghi, Complainant,v.Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 26, 2011
closed0120112660 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 26, 2011)

closed0120112660

08-26-2011

Pegah Bazeghi, Complainant, v. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.




Pegah Bazeghi,

Complainant,

v.

Eric K. Shinseki,

Secretary,

Department of Veterans Affairs,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120112660

Agency No. 200P-0691-2011101077

DECISION

Complainant filed an appeal with this Commission from the Agency's undated

final decision, dismissing a formal complaint of unlawful employment

discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

(Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. and Section 501

of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended,

29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq.

BACKGROUND

During the period at issue, Complainant worked as a Registered Nurse at

the Agency’s facility in West Los Angeles, California.

On January 25, 2011, Complainant filed a formal complaint. Therein,

Complainant claimed that the Agency subjected her to discrimination on

the bases of race, religion, and disability.

In its final decision, the Agency determined that Complainant’s formal

complaint was comprised of the following claims:

1. On October 25, 2010, Complainant was assigned to charge nurse duties;

which violated her medical restrictions; and

2. On December 10, 2010, the Associate Chief Nurse and an Instructor

informed Complainant that [she] had not met proficiency requirements

during training and orientation.

The Agency dismissed Complainant’s formal complaint. The Agency

found that claim (1) is a discrete act and that Complainant failed

to initiate EEO Counselor contact in a timely manner. Specifically,

the Agency stated that “[t]his action was effective on October 25,

201[0]; therefore your [time period] expired on December 9, 2010.”

The Agency dismissed claim (2) for failure to state a claim. The Agency

found that claim (2) was not sufficiently severe or pervasive to state

an actionable claim of harassment.

CONTENTIONS ON APPEAL

On appeal, Complainant submits a copy of the EEO Counselor’s Report.

In response, the Agency requests that we affirm its final decision

dismissing Complainant’s complaint.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

As an initial matter, we find that the Agency improperly fragmented

Complainant’s claims by viewing them as separate discrete acts.

The record reflects that Complainant is alleging that she is being

subjected to a hostile work environment comprising incidents (1) and (2).

Dismissal for Untimely EEO Counselor Contact

The Agency improperly dismissed incident (1) on the grounds of untimely

EEO Counselor contact. As set forth above, we found that the Agency

improperly fragmented Complainant’s claim. The Commission finds that

“[b]ecause the incidents that make up a hostile work environment

collectively constitute one unlawful employment practice, the entire

claim is actionable, as long, at least one incident that is part of the

claim occurred within the filing period. This includes incidents that

occurred outside the filing period that the [complainant] knew or should

have known were actionable at the time of their occurrence.” EEOC

Compliance Manual, Section 2, Threshold Issues at 2-75 (rev. July 21,

2005) (citing National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101,

117 (2002)).

In the instant matter, Complainant contacted an EEO Counselor on December

13, 2010. Incident (2) occurred within the 45-day period preceding

Complainant’s initial EEO contact. Thus, Complainant’s hostile work

environment claim is timely.1

Dismissal for Failure to State a Claim

The Commission finds that the Agency improperly dismissed incident (2)

for failure to state a claim. In Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc.,

510 U.S. 17, 21 (1993), the Supreme Court reaffirmed the holding of

Meritor Sav. Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 67 (1986), that harassment

is actionable if it is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the

conditions of a complainant's employment. The Court explained that an

"objectively hostile or abusive work environment [is created when]

a reasonable person would find [it] hostile or abusive:” and the

complainant subjectively perceives it as such. Harris, supra at 21-22.

Thus, not all claims of harassment are actionable. Where a complaint

does not challenge an agency action or inaction regarding a specific

term, condition or privilege of employment, a claim of harassment is

actionable only if, allegedly, the harassment to which the complainant

has been subjected was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the

conditions of the complainant's employment.

A complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless

it appears beyond doubt that the complainant cannot prove a set of facts

in support of the claim which would entitle the complainant to relief.

The trier of fact must consider all of the alleged harassing incidents

and remarks, and considering them together in the light most favorable to

the complainant, determine whether they are sufficient to state a claim.

Cobb v. Dep’t of the Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05970077 (Mar. 13,

1997).

Upon review of the record, we find that when viewing the alleged incidents

collectively, Complainant has set forth an actionable claim of harassment.

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, we REVERSE the Agency’s final decision dismissing

Complainant’s complaint, defined herein as a hostile work environment

claim, and we REMAND this matter to the Agency for further processing

in accordance with the ORDER below.

ORDER (E0610)

The Agency is ordered to process the remanded claims in accordance with

29 C.F.R. § 1614.108. The Agency shall acknowledge to the Complainant

that it has received the remanded claims within thirty (30) calendar

days of the date this decision becomes final. The Agency shall issue

to Complainant a copy of the investigative file and also shall notify

Complainant of the appropriate rights within one hundred fifty (150)

calendar days of the date this decision becomes final, unless the matter

is otherwise resolved prior to that time. If the Complainant requests a

final decision without a hearing, the Agency shall issue a final decision

within sixty (60) days of receipt of Complainant’s request.

A copy of the Agency’s letter of acknowledgment to Complainant and a

copy of the notice that transmits the investigative file and notice of

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

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION’S DECISION (K0610)

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 77960, Washington, DC

20013. 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 (M0610)

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), at 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

77960, Washington, DC 20013. 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 (R0610)

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 (Z0610)

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 from the Court that

the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also

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 with

the Court 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

August 26, 2011

Date

1 A fair reading of the record reflects that with respect to incident

(1) Complainant is alleging that she was reassigned to a position

that violated her medical restrictions; thus, Complainant appears to

be alleging that she was denied a reasonable accommodation. We note

that the EEOC's Compliance Manual, Section 2, “Threshold Issues,”

p. 2-73, EEOC Notice 915.003 (July 21, 2005) provides that “because an

employer has an ongoing obligation to provide a reasonable accommodation,

failure to provide such accommodation constitutes a violation each time

the employee needs it.”

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

2

0120112660

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

6

0120112660