Scott E. Williams, Complainant,v.Lawrence H. Summers, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 10, 1999
01985708 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 10, 1999)

01985708

12-10-1999

Scott E. Williams, Complainant, v. Lawrence H. Summers, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.


Scott E. Williams, )

Complainant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01985708

) Agency No. 984183

Lawrence H. Summers, )

Secretary, )

Department of the Treasury, )

Agency. )

)

DECISION

The Commission finds that the agency's June 25, 1998 decision dismissing

complainant's complaint on the basis of failure to state a claim, is

proper pursuant to the provisions of 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999)

(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R.

� 1614.107(a)(1)).<1>

The record shows that complainant sought EEO counseling and subsequently

filed a formal complaint of discrimination alleging that he had

been discriminated against on the bases of physical disability (none

specified), and reprisal for prior EEO activity when: (1) in December

1997, and June 1998, the agency failed to investigate anonymous letters

that contained negative comments about complainant's managerial skills;

(2) he was misled into believing in the existence of a report on

disabilities; (3) his name was released to the press in August 1997;

and, (4) the agency described people convicted of domestic violence as

�disabled people�.

By letter dated June 8, 1998, the agency asked complainant to clarify

his complaint. In response, complainant informed the agency that the

sole discriminatory event raised was the agency's refusal to investigate

the anonymous letters which resulted in a hostile work environment.

The agency issued a final decision dismissing the complaint on the

grounds of failure to state a claim. The agency noted that pursuant to

complainant's clarification of the complaint, the only issue considered

by the agency concerned the anonymous letters.

An agency shall accept a complaint from any aggrieved employee or

applicant 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

has held that while the regulations do not define the term "aggrieved

employee," the United States Supreme Court has interpreted it to mean

an employee 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 (Apr. 21,

1994). "To state a claim under our regulations, an employee must allege

and show an injury in fact." Id. (citing Hackett v. McGuire Bros., 445

F.2d 447 (3d Cir. 1971)). "Specifically, an employee must allege and

show a `direct, personal deprivation at the hands of the employer,' that

is, a present and unresolved harm or loss affecting a term, condition

or privilege of his/her employment." Id. (citing Hammonds v. United

States Postal Serv., EEOC Request No. 05900863 (Oct. 31, 1990); Taylor

v. United States Postal Serv., EEOC Request No. 05900367 (June 2, 1990)).

The Commission has consistently held that a remark or comment

unaccompanied by any concrete effect does not render the complainant

aggrieved. Fuller v. USPS, EEOC Request No. 05910324 (May 2, 1991).

Moreover, the incidents in question are insufficient to support a claim

of hostile work environment. See Cobb v. Department of the Treasury,

EEOC Request No. 05970077 (March 13, 1997). Accordingly, the agency's

decision dismissing the complaint is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M1199)

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). 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).

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S1199)

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:

December 10, 1999

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision

was received within five (5) calendar days of mailing. I certify that

the decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative

(if applicable), and the agency on:

________________

DATE EQUAL

EMPLOYMENT ASSISTANT1 On 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.