01a22768_r
08-21-2002
Diana P. Slyter, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Diana P. Slyter v. United States Postal Service
01A22768
August 21, 2002
.
Diana P. Slyter,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A22768
Agency No. 1I-554-0030-01
DECISION
Upon review, the Commission finds that the agency's decision dated March
19, 2002, dismissing complainant's complaint due to untimely EEO Counselor
contact and/or for failure to state a claim is proper pursuant to 29
C.F.R. �� 1614.107(a)(1) and (2). In her complaint, complainant alleged
that: (1) on December 18, 2000, she became aware that she failed 3 KSAs
for a maintenance job; (2) after calling the police on her supervisor
on February 8, 2001, on an unspecified date, she was stalked by her
supervisor and told her that she would never transfer out of vehicle
maintenance; and (3) on unspecified dates, she was harassed.
With regard to claim (1), the record indicates that complainant contacted
an EEO Counselor on February 21, 2001, which was beyond the 45-day time
limit set by the regulations. On appeal, complainant does not present
adequate justification to warrant an extension of the applicable time
limit for contacting an EEO Counselor.
With regard to claim (2), the Commission finds that the alleged isolated
incident is not sufficiently severe to state a claim. See Cobb
v. Department of the Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05970077 (March 13,
1997). Furthermore, with regard to the alleged threat, the Commission
has consistently held that a remark or comment unaccompanied by concrete
action is not a direct and personal deprivation sufficient to render
an individual aggrieved for the purposes of Title VII. Henry v. USPS,
EEOC Request No. 05940695 (February 9, 1995).
With regard to claim (3), the Commission finds that it fails to state
a claim since complainant did not provide any specific incident of
harassment, other than the above incident in claim (2). Therefore,
the Commission finds that claims (2) and (3) fail to state a claim.
Accordingly, the agency's decision is AFFIRMED.<1>
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
August 21, 2002
__________________
Date
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision
was received within five (5) calendar days after it was mailed. I certify
that this decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative
(if applicable), and the agency on:
__________________
Date
______________________________
1Although the agency dismissed claims (2) and (3) on the alternative
ground for failure to raise the matters during EEO counseling, we need
not discuss such in this decision since the dismissal is affirmed for
failure to state a claim.