Roberta L. Weikle, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 19, 2002
01A12264_r (E.E.O.C. Dec. 19, 2002)

01A12264_r

12-19-2002

Roberta L. Weikle, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Roberta L. Weikle v. United States Postal Service

01A12264

December 19, 2002

.

Roberta L. Weikle,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A12264

Agency No. 4D-250-0111-99

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from a final agency

decision dated January 17, 2001, dismissing her 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.

In her formal complaint, complainant alleged that she was subjected to

discrimination and harassment from July 1996 through September 1998,

on the bases of sex and in reprisal for her husband's prior EEO activity.

In a final decision dated September 14, 1999, the agency dismissed the

complaint on the grounds that complainant's EEO Counselor contact was

untimely. The agency also dismissed reprisal as a basis. On appeal,

the Commission reversed the dismissal of the complaint and remanded

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

EEOC Appeal No. 01A00398 (April 3, 2000).

In a final decision that is the subject matter of the instant appeal,

the agency redefined complainant's complaint as being comprised of four

claims that were identified in the following fashion:

From June 1996 until September 4, 1998, complainant was subjected to

continuous offensive and inappropriate comments and actions by the

Postmaster;

On July 28, 1998, the Postmaster made a statement to complainant's

husband about her having sex with the former Postmaster;

On August 7, 1998, the Postmaster reprimanded her because of a complaint

made to the Contracting Officer in Arlington, Virginia; and

On September 4, 1998, the agency terminated the contract complainant's

husband/employer had with the agency.

The agency dismissed all four claims. The agency dismissed claim 1 on

the grounds of untimely EEO Counselor contact. The agency dismissed

claims 2 - 4 for failure to state a claim. The agency noted that

complainant resigned from the agency on September 12, 1997, and that

she subsequently worked as a contract employee with the agency pursuant

to a contract between the agency and complainant's husband. The agency

concluded that because complainant was not an agency employee when the

matters in claims 2 - 4 occurred, complainant is not aggrieved under

EEO Regulations.

The record reveals that complainant resigned from the agency on September

12, 1997. The record further reveals that complainant's husband

contracted with the agency as a Highway Contract Driver. Complainant's

husband employed her after her resignation from the agency, to help

fulfill his contract.

Claim 1

We determine that the agency improperly dismissed claim 1 on the grounds

of untimely EEO Counselor contact. We note that in our decision dated

April 3, 2000 , cited above, we determined that complainant initiated

timely EEO Counselor contact on June 18, 1999, regarding the matter

identified in claim 1 because complainant was initially given incorrect

information and had contacted an EEO Counselor after she received correct

information. We therefore will not revisit our determination regarding

this matter. The agency's dismissal of claim 1 is REVERSED.

Claims 2 - 4

The regulation set forth at 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. �� 1614.103,

.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 finds that the agency improperly dismissed claims 2 and 3.

The Commission notes that in claim 1, complainant alleges that she

suffered ongoing harassment from the Postmaster that began when she

was an agency employee. In claims 2 and 3, complainant contends that

the harassment continued while she was a contract employee with the

agency, after her separation from agency employment in September 1997.

The Commission has previously held that former employees have standing

to file EEO complaints. See Sternberg v. Department of Defense, EEOC

Request No. 05980976 (January 9, 1990). We have further held that former

employees frequently have standing to challenge agency actions that

presently affect them and for which remedial action would be available if

they prevailed on their complaints. See Laborde v. USPS, EEOC Request

No. 05910521 (July 25, 1991). The Commission determines that claims

2 and 3 have a nexus to complainant's claim that she was subjected to

ongoing harassment while an agency employee, despite her present status

as a former employee. Consequently, the agency's dismissal of claims

2 and 3 is REVERSED.

Regarding claim 4, we note that the alleged matter only concerns actions

involving complainant's husband, which complainant does not have standing

to challenge. Therefore, we find that the agency properly dismissed

claim 4 for failure to state a claim.

Accordingly, the Commission AFFIRMS the agency's dismissal of claim 4.

The Commission REVERSES the agency's dismissals of claims 1, 2, and 3

and REMANDS these claims to the agency for further processing consistent

with this decision and the ORDER below.

ORDER (E0900)

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 (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 (T0900)

This decision affirms the agency's final decision/action 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 within ninety (90) calendar

days from the date that you receive this decision 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. 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 your appeal with the Commission, until

such time as the agency issues its final decision on your complaint.

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

December 19, 2002

__________________

Date