Charlie McMillar, Complainant,v.F. Whitten Peters, Acting Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionFeb 24, 2000
01a00736 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 24, 2000)

01a00736

02-24-2000

Charlie McMillar, Complainant, v. F. Whitten Peters, Acting Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.


Charlie McMillar, )

Complainant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01A00736

) Agency No. RX1M99279

F. Whitten Peters, )

Acting Secretary, )

Department of the Air Force, )

Agency. )

____________________________________)

DECISION

On October 26, 1999, complainant filed a timely appeal with this

Commission from a final agency decision (FAD) received by him on October

9, 1999, 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.<1> The Commission accepts the current appeal

in accordance with EEOC Order No. 960.001.

ISSUE PRESENTED

The issue presented herein is whether the agency properly dismissed the

present case for untimely EEO Counselor contact.

BACKGROUND

The record reveals that for the relevant time period, complainant was

employed by the Department of the Air Force as a sheet metal mechanic,

WG-3806-10. Complainant states that on October 23, 1998, he learned that

a female employee was selected for the inventory management specialist

position for which he applied. Furthermore, complainant states that on

February 1, 1999, he again learned that he was not selected for another

two inventory management specialist positions he applied for, but instead,

female employees were again selected for the positions.

Believing that he was the victim of discrimination, on June 10,

1999, complainant initiated contact with an EEO Counselor. During the

counseling period, complainant stated that he was not selected for three

promotions for which he applied.

Counseling failed, and on September 15, 1999, complainant filed a formal

complaint claiming he was the victim of unlawful employment discrimination

on the basis of his gender (male). The formal complaint was comprised

of the matters for which complainant underwent EEO counseling, discussed

above.

On October 5, 1999, the agency issued a final decision dismissing

the instant complaint for failure to initiate timely contact with an

EEO Counselor. Specifically, the agency found that the last alleged

discriminatory event occurred on February 1, 1999, and complainant's

initial EEO Counselor contact on June 10, 1999, was more than forty-five

days after the purported discriminatory act occurred.

On appeal, complainant argues that he did not initiate contact within the

prescribed time frame because he was unaware of the limitations period.

The agency, on appeal, and in their decision, the agency fails to address

complainant's knowledge of the EEO process.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

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.

However, where, as here, there is an issue of timeliness, "[a]n

agency always bears the burden of obtaining sufficient information

to support a reasoned determination as to timeliness." Guy,

v. Department of Energy, EEOC Request No. 05930703 (January 4, 1994)

(quoting Williams v. Department of Defense, EEOC Request No. 05920506

(August 25, 1992)). In addition, in Ericson v. Department of the Army,

EEOC Request No. 05920623 (January 14, 1993), the Commission stated

that �the agency has the burden of providing evidence and/or proof to

support its final decisions.� See also Gens v. Department of Defense,

EEOC Request No. 05910837 (January 31, 1992).

In the present case, the record clearly indicates that complainant

was untimely in initiating contact with an EEO Counselor for all three

non-selections. However, the record is also void of any evidence that

complainant was aware of the limitations period. Appropriately, to

support their decision and to rebut complainant's assertion on appeal,

the agency should have included photo copies of EEO notices within the

workplace and an affidavit swearing that the notices were posted in a

conspicuous manner for all employees to see. Therefore, without evidence

establishing that complainant was on notice of the limitations period

for contacting an EEO Counselor, the Commission finds that the agency

did not supply evidence to support their final decision. Accordingly,

the decision of the agency dismissing the present case for untimely

counselor contact was improper.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth herein, the Commission hereby REVERSES the

decision of the agency dismissing the present complaint for untimely

Counselor contact. Accordingly, the complaint is REMANDED to the agency

for further processing in accordance with this decision and applicable

regulations.

ORDER (E1199)

The agency is ORDERED to process the remanded claims in accordance with

64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656-7 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.108). The agency shall acknowledge to

the complainant that it has received the remanded claims within

thirty (30) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final.

The agency shall issue to complainant a copy of the investigative file

and also shall notify complainant 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 complainant requests a final decision without

a hearing, the agency shall issue a final decision within sixty (60)

days of receipt of complainant's request.

A copy of the agency's letter of acknowledgment to complainant and an

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 (K1199)

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

complainant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's order,

the complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement of the order.

29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(a). The complainant 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 64

Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659-60 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407, 1614.408), and 29 C.F.R. �

1614.503(g). Alternatively, the complainant 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. �� 1614.407

and 1614.408. 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 complainant files a civil action, the

administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for

enforcement, will be terminated. See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999)

(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409).

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

(R1199)

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 WITHIN NINETY (90) CALENDAR DAYS from the date

that you receive this decision. 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 (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 24, 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.