Deborah Hughes, Complainant,v.Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJun 3, 2010
0120101047 (E.E.O.C. Jun. 3, 2010)

0120101047

06-03-2010

Deborah Hughes, Complainant, v. Eric K. Shinseki, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.


Deborah Hughes,

Complainant,

v.

Eric K. Shinseki,

Secretary,

Department of Veterans Affairs,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120101047

Agency No. 200H05282009104865

DECISION

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

decision dated December 21, 2009, 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. and Section

501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29

U.S.C. � 791 et seq. Upon review, the Commission finds that complainant's

complaint was properly dismissed pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1)

for failure to state a claim. In a complaint dated November 13, 2009,

complainant alleged that she was subjected to harassment on the bases

of sex (female) and disability (physical and mental) when:

1. A coworker (C1) who had been terminated on two occasions was

permitted to return to the workplace.

2. On or around September 23, 2009, complainant became aware that

C1 made threatening statements against another co-worker (C2);

3. On numerous occasions since September 21, 2009, when C1 sees

complainant in the hallways, he "puts his hands in his pocket to intimate

(sic) me."

On appeal, complainant asserted that the agency has not taken her claim

of harassment seriously. Complainant stated that since C1 returned to

the workplace, she has been subjected to harassment. She noted that

C1 pointed his finger at her face in a "hostile, threatening manner"

and told her that he would get C2 and complainant could tell C2 about it.

She claimed that C1 approached her rather than C2 because complainant is a

female with a disability. Complainant indicated that C1 has been removed

from the agency on two previous occasions for his threatening behavior.

Despite C1's past history, complainant is concerned with the agency's

decision to allow C1 to return to her workplace. The agency requested

that the Commission affirm its decision to dismiss the complaint.

The regulation set forth at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) provides, in

relevant part, that an agency shall dismiss a complaint that fails to

state a claim. An agency shall accept a complaint from any aggrieved

employee or applicant for employment who believes that he or she has been

discriminated against by that agency because of race, color, religion,

sex, national origin, age or disabling condition. 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.103,

.106(a). The Commission's federal sector case precedent has long defined

an "aggrieved employee" as one who suffers a present harm or loss with

respect to a term, condition, or privilege of employment for which

there is a remedy. Diaz v. Department of the Air Force, EEOC Request

No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994).

In determining whether a harassment complaint states a claim in cases

where a complainant had not alleged disparate treatment regarding a

specific term, condition, or privilege of employment, the Commission

has repeatedly examined whether a complainant's harassment claims,

when considered together and assumed to be true, were sufficient to

state a hostile or abusive work environment claim. See Estate of

Routson v. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, EEOC Request

No. 05970388 (February 26, 1999).

Consistent with the Commission's policy and practice of determining

whether a complainant's harassment claims are sufficient to state a

hostile or abusive work environment claim, the Commission has repeatedly

found that claims of a few isolated incidents of alleged harassment

usually are not sufficient to state a harassment claim. See Phillips

v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05960030 (July 12,

1996); Banks v. Health and Human Services, EEOC Request No. 05940481

(February 16, 1995). Moreover, the Commission has repeatedly found that

remarks or comments unaccompanied by a concrete agency action usually are

not a direct and personal deprivation sufficient to render an individual

aggrieved for the purposes of Title VII. See Backo v. United States

Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05960227 (June 10, 1996); Henry v. United

States Postal Service, EEOC Request No.05940695 (February 9, 1995).

The Commission notes that it is clear that complainant is disturbed

by the return of C1 into her workplace. However, the Commission finds

that complainant failed to allege events which, taken as a whole, are

sufficiently severe or pervasive enough to state a claim of harassment.

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, the agency's final decision dismissing complainant's

complaint is affirmed.

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 (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

June 3, 2010

__________________

Date

2

0120101047

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

2

0120101047