Hulda W.,1 Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Headquarters), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionApr 7, 2017
0120170751 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 7, 2017)

0120170751

04-07-2017

Hulda W.,1 Complainant, v. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Headquarters), Agency.


U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

Hulda W.,1

Complainant,

v.

Megan J. Brennan,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service

(Headquarters),

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120170751

Agency No. 4X048004016

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the Agency's decision dated November 21, 2016, 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., Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq.

BACKGROUND

At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a Customer Care Agent at the Agency's Los Angeles Call Center facility in Los Angeles, California.

On July 2, 2016, Complainant made EEO contact. On October 13, 2016, Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency subjected her to discrimination on the bases of race (Caucasian), color (White), disability (Not Specified), age ("over 40"), and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity under an EEO statute that was unspecified in the record when:

1. On December 20, 2013, Complainant was forced to accept a modified work assignment or risk losing her Federal Employees Compensation Act benefits;

2. Beginning in March of 2014, Complainant's supervisor disapproved her leave requests;

3. Beginning in May of 2014, management failed to process her Office of Workers Compensation Forms CA-7 for the period May 8, 2014 through February 6, 2015;

4. On or about September 15, 2015, management belatedly granted her requested accommodation; and

5. On May 16, 2016, Complainant received a letter dated May 12, 2016, indicating that Complainant could be subject to separation for being on leave without pay for over two years and explaining her options.

Agency Decision

The Agency dismissed the complaint, finding that four of the claims were untimely filed, two failed to state a claim, and the most recent claim pertained to a preliminary step for which Complainant has not suffered an adverse action. This appeal followed.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Claim one concerned Complainant's return to work in a modified assignment, which occurred between December of 2013 and January of 2014. We find that this allegation was previously addressed in Agency Case Number 4X0480046-15.

Claim two concerned the denial of leave between March and May of 2014 and was untimely raised with an EEO Counselor.

Claim three also presented a collateral attack on another process, because it alleged an erroneous determination of eligibility for benefits under the Federal Employees Compensation Act, which falls under the jurisdiction of the Office of Workers Compensation Program.

Claim 4 pertained to the provision of an accommodation that was issued in September of 2015. To the extent that Complainant is alleging dissatisfaction with the accommodation, the claim was untimely raised with the EEO Counselor.

Finally, with regard to Claim 5, Complainant alleged discrimination with regard to Complainant's receipt of a letter explaining her rights and obligations in connection with her employment status. The letter was not itself an adverse action. It is a preliminary step in the process. Consequently, Complainant has not alleged that she was aggrieved by a personnel action.

For these reasons, we find that the complaint was properly dismissed because Complainant's EEO contact was untimely or the complaint failed to state a claim under the EEOC regulations, because Complainant failed to show that she suffered harm or loss with respect to a term, condition, or privilege of employment for which there is a remedy. See Diaz v. Dep't of the Air Force, EEOC Request No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994).

Upon review, the Commission finds that Complainant's complaint was properly dismissed pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) for failure to state a claim and pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) for untimely EEO contact.

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency's final decision dismissing Complainant's complaint.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0416)

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 tends 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 Chap. 9 � VII.B (Aug. 5, 2015). All requests and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The requests may be submitted via regular mail to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. 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 (S0610)

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 (Z0815)

If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant's Right to File a Civil Action for the specific time limits).

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden's signature

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

April 7, 2017

__________________

Date

1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant's name when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission's website.

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

---------------

------------------------------------------------------------

2

0120170751