Hyong P. Chu, Complainant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 25, 2000
01993192 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 25, 2000)

01993192

08-25-2000

Hyong P. Chu, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Hyong P. Chu v. United States Postal Service

01993192

August 25, 2000

.

Hyong P. Chu,

Complainant,

v.

William J. Henderson,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01993192

Agency No. 4E-852-0041-99

DECISION

On March 9, 1999, the complainant filed a timely appeal with this

Commission from a February 22, 1999 final agency decision dismissing

her 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.<1>

The agency dismissed the complaint pursuant to EEOC Regulation

64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(2)), noting that the complainant

failed to initiate contact with an EEO Counselor within the required

45 days. In its final decision, the agency stated that because the

alleged discriminatory incident occurred on February 10, 1998, and

the complainant did not contact an EEO Counselor until November 23,

1998, Counselor contact was untimely. The agency also noted that the

complainant should have had a reasonable suspicion of discrimination

when the alleged incident occurred.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105(a)(l) requires that complaints of

discrimination be brought to the attention of an EEO Counselor within

45 days of the date of the matter alleged to be discriminatory or, in

the case of a personnel action, within 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 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. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105(a)(2).

The complainant alleged that she was discriminated against on the bases

of race (Asian), color (dark), sex (female) and national origin (Asian)

when on February 5, 1998, she received a letter disqualifying her from

interviewing for the Associate Supervisor Program (ASP) because she

failed to meet requirements of attendance. The EEO Counselor's Report

discloses, and the complainant does not dispute, that she did not initiate

Counselor contact until November 23, 1998. The complainant also does

not argue that she was unaware of the applicable time limit. What the

complainant alleges, however, is that she did not become aware that she

was discriminated against until November 10, 1998.

In a February 25, 1999 letter, the complainant stated that she did not

become aware that she was discriminated against until November 10, 1998.

She stated that she did not learn who was accepted into the ASP until the

agency posted Bulletin 98-100 on November 10, 1998, which announced the

promotions of the ASP candidates who were interviewed in February 1998.

The complainant stated that she began inquiring about the accepted

candidates and learned that some of the candidates had worse attendance

records than she did. She was also approached by a supervisor who

told her that one of the ASP candidates had a poor attendance record.

The record contains a copy of Bulletin 98-100, dated November 10, 1998.

The Commission finds that the complainant did not reasonably suspect

discrimination until November 10, 1998. Therefore, when she contacted the

EEO Counselor on November 23, 1998, her contact was timely. The agency

has not disputed the complainant's assertion regarding how she became

aware that she was being discriminated against. The Commission has

consistently held that the agency always bears the burden of obtaining

sufficient information to support a reasoned determination as to

timeliness. Guy v. Department of Energy, EEOC Request No. 05930703

(January 4, 1994).

Finally, the Commission notes that the complainant raised concerns

regarding the processing of her complaint. The complainant stated,

however, that the EEO Compliance and Appeals Coordinator advised her

that she should bring the matter of her dissatisfaction to the agency

official responsible for the quality of complaints processing. It is

not clear that the complainant has contacted the responsible official.

The Commission advises the complainant that if she is dissatisfied with

the quality of complaints processing, she should contact the requisite

agency official. The agency should earnestly attempt to resolve any

dissatisfaction with the complaints process as early and expeditiously

as possible. EEO-MD 110 (5-25), as revised, November 9, 1999.

Consistent with the foregoing discussion, the agency's final decision is

REVERSED and the claim is REMANDED to the agency for further processing.

ORDER (E0400)

The agency is ORDERED to process the remanded claims in accordance with

64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656-7 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.108). The agency shall acknowledge to

the complainant that it has received the remanded claims within thirty

(30) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final. The agency

shall issue to complainant a copy of the investigative file and also shall

notify complainant of the appropriate rights within one hundred fifty

(150) calendar days of the date this decision becomes final, unless the

matter is otherwise resolved prior to that time. If the complainant

requests a final decision without a hearing, the agency shall issue

a final decision within sixty (60) days of receipt of complainant's

request.

A copy of the agency's letter of acknowledgment to complainant and a

copy of the notice that transmits the investigative file and notice of

rights must be sent to the Compliance Officer as referenced below.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K1199)

Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory.

The agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30)

calendar days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The

report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal

Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. The agency's report must contain supporting

documentation, and the agency must send a copy of all submissions to the

complainant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's order,

the complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement of the order.

29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(a). The complainant also has the right to file a

civil action to enforce compliance with the Commission's order prior

to or following an administrative petition for enforcement. See 64

Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659-60 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407, 1614.408), and 29 C.F.R. �

1614.503(g). Alternatively, the complainant has the right to file a

civil action on the underlying complaint in accordance with the paragraph

below entitled "Right to File A Civil Action." 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407

and 1614.408. A civil action for enforcement or a civil action on the

underlying complaint is subject to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. �

2000e-16(c)(Supp. V 1993). If the complainant files a civil action, the

administrative processing of the complaint, including any petition for

enforcement, will be terminated. See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999)

(to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409).

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).

COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION

(R0400)

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:

______________________________

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

August 25, 2000

__________________

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

______________________________

1On 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.