Eileen M. Castillo, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 7, 2009
0120092045 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 7, 2009)

0120092045

08-07-2009

Eileen M. Castillo, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Eileen M. Castillo,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120092045

Agency No. 4G-752-0054-09

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the final

agency decision dated March 6, 2009, dismissing her formal 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 the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA),

as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq.

In a formal complaint dated February 18, 2009, complainant, a Full Time

City Carrier at the agency's Grand Prairie, Texas Post Office alleged

that she was subjected to discrimination on the bases of national origin,

sex and age when:

1. She was denied a full back pay award as stipulated in a arbitration

decision dated June 13, 2008;

2. She was not permitted to work from June 13, 2008 through November 19,

2008; and

3. Her removal (originally dated March 15, 2008 and issued May 2, 2008)

that was placed into abeyance on May 23, 2008, was put into effect

November 19, 2008.

On March 6, 2009, the agency issued a final decision. Therein, the

agency dismissed claim 1 in the complaint for failure to state a claim.

The agency found that the proper forum for complainant to raise a

challenge to actions which occurred following an award through the

negotiated grievance procedure is through that forum itself. Complainant

is addressing this issue through her union and the union has already

filed a non-compliance grievance. The Commission has held that an

employee cannot use the EEO complaint process to lodge a collateral

attack on another forum's proceedings. Kleinman v. U.S.Postal Service,

EEOC Request No. 05940585 (September 22, 1994).

The agency dismissed claims 2 and 3 in the complaint stating that

complainant raised identical claims in a prior complaint, identified as

Agency No. 4G-752-0324-08 filed on July 28, 2008. which the agency had

dismissed on the grounds that this prior complaint was untimely filed. The

agency stated that, in claims 2 and 3 of the instant formal complaint,

complainant is attempting to resurrect matters that were previously

raised in the dismissed complaint.

The Commission agrees with the agency's reasoning that claim 1 in the

complaint fails to state a claim under the EEOC regulations because

complainant by filing that claim is attempting to challenge the actions

of another forum and as such failed to show that she suffered harm or

loss with respect to a term, condition, or privilege of employment for

which there is a remedy. See Diaz v. Department of the Air Force,

EEOC Request No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994).

With regard to claims 2 and 3, EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107 (a)

(1) provides that an agency shall dismiss a complaint that states the

same claim that is pending before or has been decided by the agency

or Commission. The Commission determines that the matters raised in

claims 2 and 3 are elaborations of the matters identified in the above

referenced prior complaint and, therefore, properly dismissed as the

subject of a new complaint.

Therefore, 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

August 7, 2009

__________________

Date

3

0120090191

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

4

0120092045