Henry J. Mogilka, Complainant,v.Secretary, Department of Transportation, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionApr 17, 2000
01a00529 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 17, 2000)

01a00529

04-17-2000

Henry J. Mogilka, Complainant, v. Secretary, Department of Transportation, Agency.


Henry J. Mogilka, )

Complainant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01A00529

) Agency No. 5995099 Rodney E.Slater, )

Secretary, )

Department of Transportation, )

Agency. )

____________________________________)

DECISION

On October 16, 1999, complainant filed a timely appeal with this

Commission from a final agency decision (FAD) issued on September 16,

1999, pertaining to his complaint of unlawful employment discrimination

in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,

42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq. and the Equal Pay Act of 1963, as amended,

29 U.S.C. � 206(d) et seq.<1> Pursuant to 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659

(1999) (to be codified at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405), the Commission accepts

the complainant's appeal from the agency's final decision in the

above-entitled matter.

ISSUE PRESENTED

The issue presented herein is whether the agency properly dismissed the

present complaint for failure to state a claim.

BACKGROUND

For the relevant period of time, complainant was employed by the

Department of Transportation as an Air Traffic Control Specialist,

FG-2152-14. Complainant stated that on June 15, 1999, he was informed

that Air Traffic Control Training Specialists, were being paid more

than he was despite the fact the they both perform the same duties.

Complainant further stated that this disparity in pay was due to the fact

that majority of the employees in the position of Air Traffic Control

Training Specialists are female.

Believing that he was the victim of unlawful employment discrimination,

on July 16, 1999, complainant initiated contact with an EEO Counselor.

During the counseling period, complainant stated that employees, in the

position of Air Traffic Control Training Specialists, most of which are

female, are being paid more than he is despite the fact they perform

the same duties.

Counseling failed, and on August 30, 1999, complainant filed a

formal complaint of discrimination on the basis of his gender (male).

The complaint was comprised of the matters for which complainant underwent

EEO counseling, discussed above.

On September 16, 1999, the agency issued a final decision dismissing

the present complaint for failure to state a claim. Therein, the agency

found that complainant's complaint set forth an allegation that was in

fact a generalized grievance and complainant did not demonstrate that he

suffered a personal harm with regards to the alleged action. As such,

his complaint failed to state a claim.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

The Commission finds that complainant's complaint is a generalized

grievance and, therefore, fails to state a claim. Complainant failed

to identify a specific harm that he sustained. Complainant cannot

pursue a generalized grievance that members of one protected group

are afforded benefits not offered to other protected groups, unless he

further alleges some specific injury to him as a result of the alleged

discriminatory practice. See Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 499 (1975);

Crandall v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05970508

(September 11, 1997) (claim that nurse practitioners in one unit received

more favorable treatment than nurse practitioners in other units was a

generalized grievance); Rodriguez v. Department of the Treasury, EEOC

Appeal No. 01970736 (August 28, 1997) (claim that there was an imbalance

in favoring of African-Americans, against Hispanics, in development and

promotion opportunities was a generalized grievance purportedly shared

by all Hispanic co-workers and therefore failed to state a claim).

In this case, complainant has failed to demonstrate that he has in fact

suffered a harm unique to the protected class in which he is part of.

Accordingly, the agency's decision finding that the present complaint

fails to state a claim was proper.

CONCLUSION

For the reason set forth above, the Commission hereby AFFIRMS the decision

of the agency finding that the present complaint fails to state a claim.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0300)

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 64

Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter referred

to as 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 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

(R1199)

This is a decision requiring the agency to continue its administrative

processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil

action, you have the right to file such action in an appropriate United

States District Court WITHIN NINETY (90) CALENDAR DAYS from the date

that you receive this decision. In the alternative, you may file a

civil action AFTER ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY (180) CALENDAR DAYS of the date

you filed your complaint with the agency, or filed your appeal with the

Commission. 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. 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:

April 17, 2000

Date Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision

was received within five (5) calendar days of mailing. I certify that

the decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative

(if applicable), and the agency on:

_______________ __________________________

Date Equal Employment Assistant1On November 9, 1999, revised

regulations governing the EEOC's federal sector complaint process

went into effect. These regulations apply to all federal sector

EEO complaints pending at any stage in the administrative process.

Consequently, the Commission will apply the revised regulations found

at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the

present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the

Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.