Cynthia A. Ramos, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionNov 9, 2009
0120093045 (E.E.O.C. Nov. 9, 2009)

0120093045

11-09-2009

Cynthia A. Ramos, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Cynthia A. Ramos,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120093045

Agency No. 4F-913-0104-09

DECISION

Complainant filed an appeal with this Commission from the final agency

decision dated June 7, 2009, to hold in abeyance her formal 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. and

Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act),

as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq.

In 2004, the agency began the development of the National Reassessment

Process (NRP), an effort to "standardize" the procedure used to assign

work to injured-on-duty employees. As part of the NRP, on April 9, 2009,

complainant was sent home; was told that management was no longer making

up work for limited duty employees; and was instructed not to return

to work unless the agency called her.

Believing that the agency's actions were discriminatory, complainant

contacted an EEO Counselor. Informal efforts to resolve complainant's

concerns were unsuccessful. On June 16, 2009, complainant filed the

instant formal complaint. Therein, complainant claimed that she was the

victim of unlawful employment discrimination on the bases of national

origin and disability.

In its June 7, 2009 final decision, the agency found that complainant's

individual formal complaint to be identical to the claim raised in

the class complaint, Sandra McConnell v. United States Postal Service

(Case No. 4B-140-0062-06). In the class complaint, McConnell claims that

the agency failed to engage in the interactive process during the NRP

in violation of the Rehabilitation Act. Further, the agency allegedly

failed to reasonably accommodate class members during and after the

process. The agency found that because the McConnell class complaint

is pending before the EEOC, complainant's individual complaint would be

"held in abeyance pending the outcome of the appeal of the certification

decision."

The record indicates that on May 30, 2008, an EEOC Administrative Judge

(AJ) issued a decision recommending certification of the McConnell case,

defined as: "All permanent rehabilitation employees and limited duty

employees at the agency who have been subjected to the NRP from May 5,

2006 to the present, allegedly in violation of the Rehabilitation Act."

The agency chose not to implement the decision and appealed the matter

to the Commission, where it is currently pending (Appeal No. 0720080054).

On appeal, complainant, through her representative, contends that she

agreed with the agency's final decision that her case "on the basis of

ADA (failure to accommodation) should be part of the class action of

Sandra McConnell v. John E. Potter. However, complainant is entitled

to hearing on the purview of national origin."

As an initial matter, we note that the Commission has previously held

that a complainant may appeal an agency decision to hold an individual

complaint in abeyance during the processing of a related class complaint.

See Roos v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05920101

(February 13, 1992). In addition, Equal Employment Opportunity Management

Directive-110, Chapter 8, � III(C) (November 9, 1999) provides, in

relevant part, that "an individual complaint that is filed before or

after the class complaint is filed and that comes within the definition

of the class claim(s), will not be dismissed but will be subsumed within

the class complaint."

Upon review, we find that the agency correctly held complainant's claim

on the basis of disability discrimination in abeyance. Specifically,

in her formal complaint, complainant claimed that on April 9, 2009,

she was sent home and was told that management was no longer making

up work for limited duty employees and not to return to work unless

they call her. Pursuant to the Commission's decision in McConnell,

this claim of disability discrimination is properly subsumed within the

McConnell class action.

We also find, however, that the agency improperly held complainant's

claims of discrimination based on national origin in abeyance because

these claims do not fall within the scope of McConnell.

Accordingly, the agency's decision to hold complainant's claim of

disability discrimination in abeyance is AFFIRMED. The claim is now

subsumed in the McConnell class action. The agency's decision to hold

complainant's claims of national origin is REVERSED, and this claim is

REMANDED to the agency for further processing in accordance with this

decision and the ORDER below.

ORDER (E0408)

The agency is ordered to process the remanded claim (of national origin)

in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.108 et seq. 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 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 (K1208)

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 77960,

Washington, D.C. 20013. 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 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)

(1994 & Supp. IV 1999). If the complainant files a civil action, the

administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for

enforcement, will be terminated. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M1208)

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 77960,

Washington, DC 20013. 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 (T0408)

This decision affirms the agency's final decision/action in part, but it

also requires the agency to continue its administrative processing of a

portion of your complaint. 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 on both that portion

of your complaint which the Commission has affirmed and that portion

of the complaint which has been remanded for continued administrative

processing. 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 your appeal with the Commission, until

such time as the agency issues its final decision on your complaint.

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 (Z1008)

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 from the Court that

the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also

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 with

the Court 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

November 9, 2009

__________________

Date

2

0120093045

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

5

0120093045

6

0120093045