01985588
02-03-2000
Allen Machart, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Allen Machart, )
Complainant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01985588
William J. Henderson, ) Agency No. 4G-770-0476-98
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
Agency. )
____________________________________)
DECISION
On July 1, 1998, complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission
from a final agency decision (FAD) received by his representative
on June 27, 1998, pertaining to his 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 Age Discrimination in
Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq., and
Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 791
et seq. <1> In his complaint, complainant alleged that he was subjected
to discrimination on the bases of national origin (Slavic/German), age
(53), and physical disability (seven percent disabled and allergic to
dust) when:
On March 18, 1998, complainant was placed on the restricted sick leave
list (RSL).
The agency dismissed complainant's complaint on the grounds that it
was moot. Specifically, the agency claimed that complainant entered
into a grievance settlement on April 3, 1998, which rescinded the RSL
and the discussion given to complainant. Thus, the agency claimed
that it had taken corrective action which constituted full relief and
had completely eradicated the effects of the alleged discrimination.
Furthermore, the agency stated that there was no reasonable expectation
that the alleged discrimination would recur.
On appeal, complainant states that the discrimination he experienced is
likely to recur and that no provisions have been made to protect him from
such discrimination. In addition, complainant states that part of the
remedy requested in his EEO complaint was for management to guarantee
that proper procedures be used for placing employees on the restricted
sick leave list, which according to complainant has not occurred.
Volume 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999)(to be codified and hereinafter
cited as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(5)) provides for the dismissal of a
complaint when the issues raised therein are moot. To determine whether
the issues raised in complainant's complaint are moot, the factfinder
must ascertain whether (1) it can be said with assurance that there is
no reasonable expectation that the alleged violation will recur; and
(2) interim relief or events have completely and irrevocably eradicated
the effects of the alleged discrimination. See County of Los Angeles
v. Davis, 440 U.S. 625, 631 (1979); Kuo v. Department of the Navy, EEOC
Request No. 05970343 (July 10, 1998). When such circumstances exist,
no relief is available and no need for a determination of the rights of
the parties is presented.
In the present case, the record indicates that complainant was removed
from the RSL list on April 3, 1998. In addition, other than a bare
assertion by complainant, there is no evidence that the alleged violation
is likely to recur. Therefore, we find that complainant's complaint is
moot.
Accordingly, the agency's decision that complainant's complaint was moot
is proper and is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1199)
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
64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter
referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405). 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999)
(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 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 (S1199)
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:
February 3, 2000
____________________________
Date Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director
Office of Federal Operations
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision
was received within five (5) calendar days of mailing. I certify that
the decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative
(if applicable), and the agency on:
_______________ __________________________
Date Equal Employment Assistant1On November 9, 1999, revised
regulations governing the EEOC's federal sector complaint process
went into effect. These regulations apply to all federal sector
EEO complaints pending at any stage in the administrative process.
Consequently, the Commission will apply the revised regulations found
at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the
present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the
Commission's website at WWW.EEOC.GOV.