01a51909
12-22-2005
Gregory Ridgel, Complainant, v. Jo Anne B. Barnhart, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency.
Gregory Ridgel v. Social Security Administration
01A51909
December 22, 2005
.
Gregory Ridgel,
Complainant,
v.
Jo Anne B. Barnhart,
Commissioner,
Social Security Administration,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A51909
Agency No. 03-0176-SSA
DECISION
Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405, the Commission accepts complainant's
appeal from the agency's final decision in the above-entitled matter.
Complainant alleged that the agency discriminated against him on the
basis of reprisal for prior EEO activity when he was given a three day
suspension.
The record indicates the complainant a telephone Contact Representative,
was informed that his second level supervisor (RMO) wanted to see
him. Complainant stated that he refused to meet with RMO unless there
was a union representative with him. Because of this, RMO came to
complainant's desk and left an envelope on it (complainant complains
about the manner in which it was left, stating that it was thrown). The
letter informed complainant that he was being suspended for three days
for disrespectful behavior towards his supervisor (he called her a �black
bitch') and for his failure to �follow clearly communicated directives
and/or instructions� from his manager. Basically the suspension letter
indicated that complainant was repeatedly absent from his work area
despite warnings from his supervisor. Complainant on one hand states
that he never got the suspension letter and on the other hand states
it was thrown. Further, he states he did not read the suspension
letter. Complainant states that he was being harassed by being suspended
and in the manner which he was notified and that this was because he
had filed a sex harassment complaint (which he later withdrew) against
his first level supervisor.
The matter was investigated, and initially complainant requested a
hearing, but later withdrew his request. Thereafter the agency issued
its final decision finding no reprisal or harassment. In addition,
complainant raised other claims which were dismissed by the agency for
untimely EEO counselor contact. Complainant filed the instant appeal,
but did not make any arguments in his appeal.
The complainant can establish a prima facie case of reprisal
discrimination by presenting facts that, if unexplained, reasonably give
rise to an inference of discrimination. Shapiro v. Social Security
Admin., EEOC Request No. 05960403 (Dec. 6, 1996) (citing McDonnell
Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973)). Specifically,
a complainant may establish a prima facie case of reprisal by showing
that: (1) he engaged in a protected activity; (2) the agency was aware
of the protected activity; (3) subsequently, he was subjected to adverse
treatment by the agency; and (4) a nexus exists between the protected
activity and the adverse treatment. Whitmire v. Department of the Air
Force, EEOC Appeal No. 01A00340 (September 25, 2000).
To the extent that Complainant may have established a prima facie case
of reprisal, the record indicates that complainant did not show that
the agency's reasons for his suspension were a pretext for reprisal.
Other than his bare assertions, he has produced no evidence to show he
was being treated differently or that the suspension was related to his
prior EEO activity. Further, to the extent that he has raised a claim
of harassment, the incidents as he described them simply are not severe
or pervasive and do not raise to the level of harassment.
After a review of the record in its entirety it is the decision of the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to affirm the agency's final
decision because the preponderance of the evidence of record does not
establish that discrimination occurred. Further, the dismissal of the
other claims for untimely EEO counselor contact is affirmed.
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
December 22, 2005
__________________
Date