McCozyell Woods, Complainant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMay 2, 2001
01A12016_r (E.E.O.C. May. 2, 2001)

01A12016_r

05-02-2001

McCozyell Woods, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


McCozyell Woods v. USPS

01A12016

May 2, 2001

.

McCozyell Woods,

Complainant,

v.

William J. Henderson,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A12016

Agency No. 1-J-602-0078-00

DECISION

Upon review, the Commission finds that complainant's complaint was

properly dismissed pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(2) for untimely

EEO Counselor contact.

The record in this case contains an EEO Counselor's Report which indicates

that complainant underwent EEO counseling on the issue of having been

denied training on October 8, 1999. Informal efforts to resolve her

concerns were unsuccessful.

On October 10, 2000, complainant filed a formal complaint, alleging

that she was subjected to discrimination based on race, age and sex.

Complainant alleged therein she was discriminated against when she

requested but was denied training on all the duties of her bid assignment,

and that three other employees have received training.

On December 27, 2000, the agency dismissed the formal complaint upon

finding that the alleged agency action occurred in October 1999, but

that complainant failed to seek EEO counseling until July 14, 2000.

Complainant, on appeal, argues that the agency's denial of her training

is a �continuing situation.�

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 forty-five (45) days of the effective date of the action.

The Commission has adopted a "reasonable suspicion" standard (as opposed

to a "supportive facts" standard) to determine when the forty-five (45)

day limitation period is triggered. See Howard v. Department of the Navy,

EEOC Request No. 05970852 (February 11, 1999). Thus, the time limitation

is not triggered until a complainant reasonably suspects discrimination,

but before all the facts that support a charge of discrimination have

become apparent.

EEOC Regulations provide that the agency or the Commission shall extend

the time limits when the individual shows that she was not notified of the

time limits and was not otherwise aware of them, that she did not know

and reasonably should not have known that the discriminatory matter or

personnel action occurred, that despite due diligence she was prevented

by circumstances beyond her control from contacting the Counselor within

the time limits, or for other reasons considered sufficient by the agency

or the Commission.

The Commission finds that the agency properly dismissed Complainant's

complaint for untimely EEO Counselor contact. Complainant does not

assert that she was unaware of the 45-day deadline and presents no

explanation for her delay. The Commission notes that though complainant

asserts on appeal that the training denial is a continuing situation,

the Commission nevertheless determines that the continuing violation

standard is inapplicable to this case because pre-complaint documents

reflect that the sole incident of discrimination occurred October 8,

1999, more than forty-five days prior to initial EEO Counselor contact.

The agency's decision to dismiss the complaint for untimely EEO contact

was proper and is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0900)

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 (S0900)

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:

______________________________

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

May 2, 2001

__________________

Date