Deangeles Davis, Complainant,v.Robert M. Gates, Secretary, Department of Defense, (Defense Contract Management Agency), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJan 28, 2009
0120071985 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 28, 2009)

0120071985

01-28-2009

Deangeles Davis, Complainant, v. Robert M. Gates, Secretary, Department of Defense, (Defense Contract Management Agency), Agency.


Deangeles Davis,

Complainant,

v.

Robert M. Gates,

Secretary,

Department of Defense,

(Defense Contract Management Agency),

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120071985

Agency No. YS-07-0008

DECISION

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

final decision dated January 5, 2007, dismissing her complaint of unlawful

employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights

Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.

On October 16, 2006, complainant initiated EEO Counselor contact.

Informal efforts to resolve her concerns were unsuccessful. On November

22, 2006, complainant filed the instant formal complaint. Therein,

complainant alleged that she was subjected to discrimination on the

bases of race, sex, and in reprisal for prior EEO activity when1:

(1) On April 15, 2005, she was terminated from Federal Service and the

local Commander did not make an inquiry to determine her eligibility to

apply for disability retirement, and she did not inform complainant of

her disability retirement rights.

(2) Prior to, and after her separation, complainant was subjected to

harassment from agency officials when:

(a) an agency manager was pressuring her to quit her job by stating

that she should resign "...before they terminate you and you lose your

pension;"

(b) on or about April 15, 2005, agency officials worked collusively with

the union to undermine her position as the standing union president;

(c) on June 11, 2005, the local Commander submitted a false affidavit

to strengthen the government's case; and

(d) on August 1, 2005, the local Commander misrepresented the facts

during her unemployment benefits hearing.

(3) In October 2006, the local Commander misrepresented the facts when

speaking to the EEO Counselor on the instant case, stating she had asked

complainant many times for medical documentation.

In its January 5, 2007 final decision, the agency dismissed complainant's

complaint on a variety of grounds. It is from this decision that

complainant now appeals.

First, the agency dismissed claim (1) as a collateral attack on a decision

by the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). The record establishes

that on June 8, 2006, the MSPB issued a decision affirming complainant's

removal. MSPB Docket No. AT-0752-05-0596-I-2. On September 19, 2006,

this Commission issued a decision concurring with the MSPB's finding of

no discrimination. EEOC Petition No. 0320060115. Accordingly, the agency

properly dismissed claim (1) pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) and

(4), and is affirmed.

The agency also dismissed claim (2) on the grounds of untimely EEO

Counselor contact pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(2). 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 record indicates that

the most recent harassing event identified by complainant occurred on

August 1, 2005, but she did not initiate contact with an EEO counselor

until October 16, 2006, well beyond the 45-day limitation period.

A hostile work environment claim will not be time barred if all acts

constituting the claim are part of the same unlawful practice even if some

component acts of hostile work environment fall outside the statutory

time period so long as an act contributing to the claim falls within

the filing period. National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. Morgan,

Jr., 536 U.S. 101, 117 (2002). However, the record in the instant

case does not establish an alleged incident occurred within 45 days

of complainant's October 16, 2006, EEO counselor contact. Accordingly,

the agency's dismissal of claim (2) on timeliness grounds is affirmed.

Finally, with regard to claim (3), the Commission finds that it fails

to state an independent claim of discrimination, but rather concerns

the veracity of a witness to the instant complaint. Therefore, it is

appropriately dismissed pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1).

Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, the agency's dismissal of

the instant complaint in its entirety is affirmed.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0408)

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, D.C. 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 (S0408)

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 (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

January 28, 2009

__________________

Date

1 For purposes of clarity, the Commission as numbered complainant's

claims as claims 1 - 3.

??

??

??

??

2

0120071985

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

4

0120071985