0120092689
08-19-2011
Wendell K. Greenleaf, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southwest Area), Agency.
Wendell K. Greenleaf,
Complainant,
v.
Patrick R. Donahoe,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Southwest Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120092689
Agency No. 4G-770-0094-09
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the Agency's
decision dated May 4, 2009, dismissing his complaint of unlawful
employment discrimination in violation of in violation of Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
et seq. Upon review, the Commission finds that Complainant's complaint
was improperly dismissed pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(1) for
failure to state a claim.
BACKGROUND
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked
as a Labor Relations Specialist at the Agency’s facility in Houston,
Texas. On April 21, 2009, Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging
that the Agency subjected him to discrimination on the bases of race
(African American), sex (male), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO
activity when:
1. With regard to Complainant’s Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA),
management investigated Complainant’s personal records; private and
confidential records were discussed by upper management; and management
refused to sign Complainant’s leave requests and give him copies; and
2. Complainant was given a heavy workload and less desirable assignments.
On May 4, 2009, the Agency issued a final decision dismissing the
complaint on the basis that it failed to state a claim. Specifically,
the decision stated that the alleged actions were not severe or pervasive
enough to constitute a hostile work environment and did not involve
sufficient harm or loss to the terms, conditions, or privileges of
Complainant’s employment to render him aggrieved. Complainant did
not submit a statement on appeal.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
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,
1614.106(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).
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).
In this case, we first note that the Agency’s decision analyzed
Complainant’s complaint as consisting of two claims. However, a
fair reading of Complainant’s complaint reveals that he is alleging a
single claim of ongoing harassment. Therefore, the Agency erred when
it fragmented his complaint. Further, we find that when considering
Complainant’s complaint as a whole, the alleged actions may be
sufficiently severe to constitute a hostile work environment. We note
that the Commission has a policy of considering reprisal claims with a
broad view of coverage. See Carroll v. Dep’t of the Army, EEOC Request
No. 05970939 (Apr. 4, 2000). Under Commission policy, claimed retaliatory
actions which can be challenged are not restricted to those which affect a
term or condition of employment. Rather, a complainant is protected from
any discrimination that is reasonably likely to deter protected activity.
See EEOC Compliance Manual Section 8, "Retaliation," No. 915.003 (May
20, 1998), at 8-15; see also Carroll, supra. We further note that
Complainant’s complaint includes an allegation which, if true, may
constitute a per se violation of the Rehabilitation Act’s proscription
on disclosure of confidential medical information. See 29 C.F.R. §�
�1630.14(c)(1); Grazier v. Dep’t of Labor, EEOC Appeal No. 0120102711
(Sept. 30, 2010). It was therefore improper for the Agency to dismiss
the instant complaint for failure to state a claim.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the Commission REVERSES the Agency’s dismissal of
Complainant’s complaint and REMANDS this matter to the Agency for
further processing consistent with this decision and 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 19, 2011
Date
2
0120092689
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013