01A23762_r
05-15-2003
Sandra Thomas, Complainant, v. Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary, Department of Defense, (Defense Commissary Agency), Agency.
Sandra Thomas v. Department of Defense (Defense Commissary Agency)
01A23762
May 15, 2003
.
Sandra Thomas,
Complainant,
v.
Donald H. Rumsfeld,
Secretary,
Department of Defense,
(Defense Commissary Agency),
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A23762
Agency No. 02DCM086001
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the agency's
decision dated June 7, 2002, 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
complaint, complainant alleged that she was subjected to discrimination
on the basis of race when:
On or about September 17, 2001, complainant was ordered by her supervisor
to return her vendor stocking badge due to an incident that occurred
July 13, 2001.
The agency dismissed the complaint after determining that complainant
was employed the agency as a store worker, but that she was employed as
a vendor stocker by a contract vendor for the agency, and not the agency
itself. Accordingly, the agency found that the vendor terminated her
vendor stocking employment and therefore her complaint must be dismissed
pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1), for failure to state a claim.
The Commission has applied the common law of agency test to determine
whether complainant is an agency employee under Title VII. See Ma
v. Department of Health and Human Services, EEOC Appeal No. 01962390 (June
1, 1998) (citing Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. et al v. Darden, 503
U.S. 318, 323-24 (1992)). Specifically, the Commission will look to the
following non-exhaustive list of factors: (1) the extent of the employer's
right to control the means and manner of the worker's performance; (2)
the kind of occupation, with reference to whether the work is usually done
under the direction of a supervisor or is done by a specialist without
supervision; (3) the skill required in the particular occupation; (4)
whether the "employer" or the individual furnishes the equipment used and
the place of work; (5) the length of time the individual has worked; (6)
the method of payment, whether by time or by the job; (7) the manner in
which the work relationship is terminated, i.e., by one or both parties,
with or without notice and explanation; (8) whether annual leave is
afforded; (9) whether the work is an integral part of the business of the
"employer"; (10) whether the worker accumulates retirement benefits;
(11) whether the "employer" pays social security taxes; and (12) the
intention of the parties. See Ma, EEOC Appeal No. 01962390.
In Ma, the Commission noted that the common-law test contains, "no
shorthand formula or magic phrase that can be applied to find the answer
. . . [A]ll of the incidents of the relationship must be assessed and
weighed with no one factor being decisive." Id. (citations omitted).
The Commission in Ma also noted that prior applications of the test
established in Spirides v. Reinhardt, 613 F.2d 826 (D.C. Cir. 1979),
using many of the same elements considered under the common law test,
was not appreciably different from the common law of agency test. See Id.
Under this test, the Commission finds that the record is inadequate for
the Commission to determine whether complainant was an agency employee
(for purposes of Title VII) with the agency while performing her part-time
employment as a vendor stocker. We find that consideration of the terms
of the agency's contract with the vendor is essential to any analysis
of complainant's employee/independent contractor status. Similarly,
the analysis must take into consideration the extent of the agency's
supervision and control over complainant's employment with the contract
vendor. Accordingly, we will direct the agency to conduct a supplemental
investigation and to place in the record documentation regarding the
agency's contract with the vendor and to analyze complainant's part-time
work as a vendor stocker with respect to the factors cited in Ma, supra.
For the reasons set forth herein, the Commission VACATES the decision
of the agency dismissing the complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �
1614.107(a)(1). The complaint is REMANDED to the agency for further
processing consistent with the order herein.
ORDER
The agency is ORDERED to conduct a supplemental investigation, which
shall focus on the factors set forth in Ma, supra, including the extent
to which the agency was able to control the ''means and manner''
of complainant's work as a vendor stocker. The agency shall place
in the record a copy of the contract under which complainant worked
for the vendor, as previously specified in this decision. Thereafter,
the agency shall either issue a final decision dismissing the complaint
or letter accepting the complaint for investigation. The supplemental
investigation and issuance of the final decision or letter of acceptance
must be completed within 30 calendar days of the date this decision
becomes final. A copy of the final decision must be submitted 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 (R0900)
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 (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
May 15, 2003
__________________
Date