01983186
03-19-1999
Randall Bowen, Appellant, v. Richard J. Danzig, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.
Randall Bowen v. Department of the Navy
01983186
March 19, 1999
Randall Bowen, )
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01983186
) Agency No. DON-97-62573-001
Richard J. Danzig, )
Secretary, )
Department of the Navy, )
Agency. )
)
DECISION
The Commission finds that the agency's March 3, 1998 decision dismissing
appellant's complaint on the basis of failure to state a claim and failure
to cooperate, is not proper pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(a) and (g).
The record shows that appellant alleged that he had been discriminated
against on the basis of sex (male) when on April 12, 1996, a lieutenant
commander ( the LCdr) made him the subject of harassing, degrading and
discriminatory comments about his physical appearance, long hair and
work knowledge. Appellant alleged that these comments were made by the
LCdr during an inspection of the facility at a closed meeting of junior
personnel, including personnel under appellant's supervision, and that the
comments had the effect of undermining his authority with the personnel
he supervises. Finally, he alleged that as a result of the comments in
question, he had been subjected to a hostile work environment.
The agency issued a final decision dismissing the complaint on the
grounds of failure to state a claim. The agency further found that
although appellant alleged that the agency had created a hostile work
environment, when asked to specify which incidents had created the
hostile work environment, he failed to provide the requested information.
Therefore, the agency also dismissed the complaint on the basis of
appellant's failure to cooperate pursuant to 29 C.F.R.�1614.107(g).
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 repeatedly found that allegations of a few isolated
incidents of alleged harassment usually are not sufficient to state a
harassment claim. See Phillips v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC
Request No. 05960030 (July 12, 1996); Banks v. Health and Human Services,
EEOC Request No. 05940481 (February 16, 1995). Moreover, the Commission
has repeatedly found that remarks or comments unaccompanied by a concrete
agency action usually are not a direct and personal deprivation sufficient
to render an individual aggrieved for the purposes of Title VII.
See Backo v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05960227 (June 10,
1996); Henry v. U.S. Postal Service, EEOC Request No.05940695 (February
9, 1995). However, in this case, appellant, a supervisor, not only claims
that he has been harassed by an agency official who has made derogatory
comments about his physical appearance and work knowledge, appellant
also claims that the negative comments about his appearance and work
knowledge have undermined or diminished his authority as a supervisor.
Based on the foregoing, we find that appellant has stated a claim under
EEOC Regulations.
Regarding the dismissal of the complaint on the grounds of appellant's
failure to cooperate, EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(g) provides
that instead of dismissing for failure to cooperate, the complaint may
be adjudicated if sufficient information for that purpose is available.
We find that there is sufficient evidence in the record to adjudicate
the complaint.
Accordingly, the final agency decision is REVERSED. The complaint is
REMANDED for further processing in accordance with this decision and
applicable regulations.
ORDER (E1092)
The agency is ORDERED to process the remanded allegations in accordance
with 29 C.F.R. �1614.108. The agency shall acknowledge to the appellant
that it has received the remanded allegations 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. �l6l4.604(c).
RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (R0993)
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. 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. 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 (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:
March 19, 1999
DATE Ronnie Blumenthal, Director
Office of Federal Operations