Carol A. Stallings, Complainant,v.Lawrence H. Summers, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJul 24, 2000
01a03651 (E.E.O.C. Jul. 24, 2000)

01a03651

07-24-2000

Carol A. Stallings, Complainant, v. Lawrence H. Summers, Secretary, Department of the Treasury, Agency.


Carol A. Stallings v. Department of Treasury

01A03651

July 24, 2000

.

Carol A. Stallings,

Complainant,

v.

Lawrence H. Summers,

Secretary,

Department of the Treasury,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A03651

Agency No. 00-3136

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from an agency's

decision dismissing her complaint of unlawful employment discrimination

brought under 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>

We accept the appeal pursuant to 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999)

(to be codified at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405).

After unsuccessful EEO counseling, complainant filed a formal complaint

claiming that she was subjected to discrimination on the bases of race,

color, religion, sex, age, and disability when her supervisor did not

forward the necessary paperwork for her to attend a training course in

February 2000, and subsequently lied about it to agency officials to

cover up his actions.

The agency dismissed the complaint as moot finding that complainant

subsequently attended the same training course the next month, thereby

eradicating the effects of the alleged violation. The agency additionally

found that there was no likelihood of a reoccurrence, and that there was

no live controversy regarding this matter. Specifically, the agency found

that no one from complainant's work site was selected for the training

because of workload considerations and because the same training was

being offered the next month at complainant's work site.

On appeal, complainant argues that the complaint is not moot because

the issue is not the denial of training, but the supervisor's failure to

submit the paperwork for her attendance. Complainant contends that she

will suffer future harm if the supervisor continues to fail to submit

her paperwork because she could miss out on details and assignments that

could enhance her career.

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.

As a threshold matter, notwithstanding complainant's contention to the

contrary, the Commission determines that the agency properly framed the

issue in the instant complaint as denial of the February 2000 training

opportunity, with the alleged non-submission of the paperwork for

attendance being the means identified to accomplish this. We also find

that the record demonstrates that complainant attended the March 2000

session at her worksite, along with the other worker who complainant

claimed had been permitted to attend the earlier session. Therefore,

we find that an interim event (the March 2000 training) eradicated the

effects of the alleged act of discrimination. Moreover, complainant

presents no evidence that this supervisor failed to submit her paperwork

for any other career enhancing opportunities, such that her claim

that he may do this again in the future is speculative. We note that

complainant additionally contends that her supervisor also lied about

other matters in an alleged attempt to conceal his actions. Even if true,

we find that this is insufficient to demonstrate a likelihood that he

would again deny complainant a career enhancing opportunity by failing

to prepare the paperwork. Furthermore, as a remedy complainant requests

only �managerial removal,� and does not seek compensatory damages.

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth herein, we find that complainant

is no longer aggrieved by the denial to attend the February 2000 training,

and we AFFIRM the agency's dismissal of this complaint as moot.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0300)

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); 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 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).

COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0400)

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:

July 24, 2000

____________________________

Date Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations

1On 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.