David A. Ortega, Complainant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJan 18, 2000
01991276 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 18, 2000)

01991276

01-18-2000

David A. Ortega, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


David A. Ortega, )

Complainant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01991276

) Agency No. 4G-7600333-98

William J. Henderson, )

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, )

Agency. )

____________________________________)

DECISION

On November 25, 1998, complainant filed a timely appeal with this

Commission from a final agency decision issued on October 28, 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.<1> The Commission accepts complainant's appeal

in accordance with EEOC No. 960.001.

ISSUE PRESENTED

The issue presented herein is whether the agency properly dismissed the

instant complaint for failure to state a claim.

BACKGROUND

The record reflects that on August 28, 1998, complainant initiated

contact with an EEO Counselor. During the counseling period, complainant

claimed to have been discriminated against when on August 10, 1998,

the EEO Counselor assigned to investigate his prior complaint, advised

management not to provide complainant with the opportunity to act or

train in a supervisory capacity.

Unable to resolve this matter informally, complainant filed a formal

complaint on September 24, 1998. The formal complaint claimed that

complainant was the victim of unlawful employment discrimination on the

bases of reprisal for engaging in prior EEO activity. The complaint was

comprised of the matters for which complainant underwent EEO counseling,

discussed above.

On October 28, 1998, the agency issued a final decision dismissing the

instant complaint for failure to state a claim. The agency found that the

complaint involved a claim of dissatisfaction with the EEO process and

should have been properly raised with the agency official responsible

for the quality of complaint processing pursuant to the MD-110.

Specifically, the agency noted that the statements at issue were made

during resolution attempts on complainant's prior complaint. Therefore,

the agency dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim.

On appeal, neither complainant nor the agency raises any new arguments.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Volume 64 Fed. Reg. 37644, 37656 (1999) (to be codified as 29

C.F.R. �1614.107(a)(8)) provides that the agency shall dismiss an

entire complaint that alleges dissatisfaction with the processing of a

previously filed complaint (spin-off complaint). In the instant case,

complainant's claim involves complainant's dissatisfaction with the

handling of a previous EEO complaint. Therefore, under the Commission's

regulations, the agency is required to dismiss complainant's claims of

improper processing. When claims of improper processing are raised, the

complainant should be referred to the agency official responsible for

the quality of complaints processing, and the agency should earnestly

attempt to resolve any dissatisfaction with the complaints process as

early and expeditiously as possible. EEOC-MD 110 (5-25), as revised,

November 9, 1999. Complainant is therefore advised to contact an official

in the agency's EEO office, if he believes that any complaint has been

improperly processed.

Accordingly, the agency's final decision is AFFIRMED for the reasons

set forth above.

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:

January 18, 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.