Sharon Stokes-Nixon, Appellant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJun 16, 1999
01984264_r (E.E.O.C. Jun. 16, 1999)

01984264_r

06-16-1999

Sharon Stokes-Nixon, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Sharon Stokes-Nixon, )

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01984264

) Agency No. 4-K-210-0135-97

William J. Henderson, )

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, )

Agency. )

)

DECISION

Appellant filed an appeal with this Commission from a final decision of

the agency concerning her 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. The final agency decision was issued on

January 29, 1998. The appeal was postmarked May 4, 1998. Accordingly,

the appeal is timely (see 29 C.F.R. �1614.402(a)), and is accepted in

accordance with EEOC Order No. 960, as amended.<1>

ISSUES PRESENTED

The issues on appeal are whether the agency properly dismissed allegation

1 of appellant's complaint on the grounds of untimely EEO contact and

allegation 2 on the grounds of failure to state a claim.

BACKGROUND

Appellant initiated contact with an EEO Counselor on July 30, 1997.

On November 10, 1997, appellant filed a formal EEO complaint wherein

she alleged that she was discriminated against on the bases of her race

(black) and in reprisal for her previous EEO activity when:

1. On July 7, 1996, she was suspended and she received emergency

placement in an off-duty status, effective July 16, 1996.

2. On July 3, 1997, July 29, 1997, and September 4, 1997, her supervisor

refused to fill her stamp order.

In its final decision, the agency dismissed allegation 1 of appellant's

complaint on the grounds that appellant failed to contact an EEO Counselor

in a timely manner. The agency determined that appellant's EEO contact

was more than a year after the emergency placement in an off-duty

status became effective. According to the agency, appellant offered

no evidence to justify an extension of the 45-day limitation period.

The agency dismissed allegation 2 on the grounds of failure to state

a claim. The agency noted that appellant's supervisor stated that he

informed appellant that he was not filling the stamp order because it

looked unprofessional. The agency determined that appellant submitted no

evidence to demonstrate that she suffered any harm or injury with respect

to her supervisor speaking to her in the alleged manner. Thereafter,

appellant filed the instant appeal.

In response, the agency asserts that appellant had constructive notice of

the 45-day limitation period for contacting an EEO Counselor. In support

of its position, the agency submits an affidavit from the Postmaster

that states the EEO poster is posted on the EEO bulletin board and has

been on display for the past seven years since 1990. The affidavit

further states that the EEO poster informs the individual that they

must contact an EEO Counselor within 45 calendar days of the date of

the alleged discriminatory act or, if a personnel action is involved,

within 45 calendar days of its effective date.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �1614.105(a)(1) requires that complaints of

discrimination should be brought to the attention of the Equal Employment

Opportunity Counselor within forty-five (45) days of the date of the

matter alleged to be discriminatory or, in the case of a personnel action,

within 45 days of the effective date of the action.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �1614.105(a)(2) provides that the agency or the

Commission shall extend the 45-day time limit when the individual shows

that he or she was not notified of the time limits and was not otherwise

aware of them, that he or she did not know and reasonably should not have

known that the discriminatory matter or personnel action occurred, that

despite due diligence he or she was prevented by circumstances beyond his

or her control from contacting the counselor within the time limits, or

for other reasons considered sufficient by the agency or the Commission.

Appellant alleges that he was discriminated against when she was suspended

and she received an emergency placement in an off-duty status, effective

July 16, 1996. Appellant did not initiate contact with an EEO Counselor

until July 30, 1997, after the expiration of the 45-day limitation period.

Appellant has not offered adequate justification for an extension of

the limitation period. Accordingly, the agency's decision to dismiss

allegation 1 on the grounds of untimely EEO contact was proper and

is AFFIRMED.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(a) provides that an agency may dismiss

a complaint which fails to state a claim pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �1614.103.

For employees and applicants for employment, EEOC Regulation 29

C.F.R. �1614.103 provides that individual and class complaints of

employment discrimination prohibited by Title VII (discrimination on

the bases of race, color, religion, sex and national origin), the ADEA

(discrimination on the basis of age when the aggrieved individual is

at least 40 years of age) and the Rehabilitation Act (discrimination on

the basis of disability) shall be processed in accordance with Part 29

C.F.R. �1614 of the EEOC Regulations.

The only proper inquiry, therefore, in determining whether an allegation

is within the purview of the EEO process is whether the complainant is an

aggrieved employee and whether s/he has alleged employment discrimination

covered by the EEO statutes. 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 (Apr. 21, 1994).

Appellant alleges that her supervisor on three occasions refused

her requests to fill her stamp order. We find that the denial of

these requests caused appellant to suffer harm with regard to a term,

condition, or privilege of appellant's employment. Accordingly, the

agency's decision to dismiss allegation 2 of appellant's complaint for

failure to state a claim was improper and is REVERSED. Allegation 2 is

hereby REMANDED for further processing in accordance with the ORDER below.

ORDER (E1092)

The agency is ORDERED to process the remanded allegation (Allegation 2)

in accordance with 29 C.F.R. �1614.108. The agency shall acknowledge to

the appellant that it has received the remanded allegation (Allegation 2)

within thirty (30) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final.

The agency shall issue to appellant a copy of the investigative file and

also shall notify appellant 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 appellant

requests a final decision without a hearing, the agency shall issue a

final decision within sixty (60) days of receipt of appellant's request.

A copy of the agency's letter of acknowledgment to appellant 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 (K0595)

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 appellant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's

order, the appellant may petition the Commission for enforcement of

the order. 29 C.F.R. �1614.503 (a). The appellant 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. �� 1614.408, 1614.409, and 1614.503 (g). Alternatively,

the appellant 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. �� 1614.408 and 1614.409. 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) (Supp. V 1993). If the

appellant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the

complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated.

See 29 C.F.R. �1614.410.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0795)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the appellant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available

when the previous decision was issued; or

2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,

regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or

3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial

precedential implications.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST

BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this

decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive

a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in

opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider

MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party

WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request

to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.407. All requests and arguments

must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received

by the Commission.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances

have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,

a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the

delay and 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).

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (T0993)

This decision affirms the agency's final decision 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 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.

It is the position of the Commission that 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.

You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have

interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that

a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the

date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action

is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)

CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult

an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction

in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)

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:

June 16, 1999

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations1 The agency was unable to supply

a copy of a certified mail return receipt or any other material

capable of establishing the date appellant received the agency's

final decision. Accordingly, since the agency failed to submit

evidence of the date of receipt, the Commission presumes that

appellant's appeal was filed within thirty (30) calendar days of

receipt of the agency's final decision. See, 29 C.F.R. �1614.402.