01a51216
02-25-2005
Dennis A. Praniewicz, Complainant, v. Dr. Francis J. Harvey, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.
Dennis A. Praniewicz v. Department of the Army
01A51216
February 25, 2005
.
Dennis A. Praniewicz,
Complainant,
v.
Dr. Francis J. Harvey,
Secretary,
Department of the Army,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A51216
Agency No. ARCEPIT04JUN0009
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the agency's
decision dated October 15, 2004, dismissing his 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., Section
501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended,
29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act
of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq. In his complaint,
complainant alleged that he was subjected to discrimination on the bases
of race, sex, disability, and age when:
He was not permitted to utilize his chain of command to address his
concerns. Complainant stated that he met with the Pittsburgh District
Commander on September 4, 2003 to request consideration of his issues
and never received any answers. He alleged that he also requested to
speak with the Great Lakes and Ohio River Division Commander and the
Chief of Engineers, but his request was never acknowledged.
The process for completing his performance evaluation for the rating
period of September 1, 2001 through October 31, 2002 was not properly
followed in that the rater and senior rater should complete and sign the
evaluation prior to the ratee receiving and signing. Complainant alleged
that he was asked to sign the rating prior to senior rater signing it.
Complainant stated he asked for a reconsideration of the rating on
November 14, 2002, which was denied.
Complainant was required to obtain a Certificate of Medical Examination
prior to returning to work. Due to a delay in obtaining a doctor's
appointment, complainant was on leave without pay for 168 hours for the
period June 25, 2002 through July 24, 2002.
Complainant's performance ratings dropped for both the 2001 and 2000
rating periods from a Level 2 to a Level 3 rating after having filed an
EEO complaint in 1999.
In its final decision, the agency dismissed complainant complaint for
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 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 he was not notified of the
time limits and was not otherwise aware of them, that he did not know
and reasonably should not have known that the discriminatory matter or
personnel action occurred, that despite due diligence he was prevented
by circumstances beyond his control from contacting the Counselor within
the time limits, or for other reasons considered sufficient by the agency
or the Commission.
In this matter, the events in complainant's complaint occurred between
the year 2000 and September 4, 2003. The record reveals that complainant
did not initiate EEO counselor contact until June 4, 2004, which is well
beyond forty-five day time-frame. On appeal, complainant has offered no
explanation that would warrant an extension or waiver of the applicable
time limits. Consequently, we find that the agency properly dismissed
complainant's complaint for untimely counselor contact. Accordingly,
the Commission AFFIRMS the agency's dismissal of complainant's complaint.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0701)
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 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 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 (S0900)
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:
______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
_February 25, 2005______________
Date