John D. Metz, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 6, 2004
01a45866 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 6, 2004)

01a45866

12-06-2004

John D. Metz, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


John D. Metz v. United States Postal Service

01A45866

.

John D. Metz,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A45866

Agency No. 4G-870-0039-04

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the

final agency decision dismissing his 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 filed on March 30, 2004, complainant claimed

that he was subjected to discrimination on the bases of age and in

reprisal for prior protected activity when on December 13, 2003, he was

threatened with employment termination; and he was denied official time

as a representative.

On July 28, 2004, the agency issued a final decision dismissing the

instant complaint for failure to state a claim.

The regulation set forth at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) provides, in

relevant part, that an agency shall dismiss a complaint that fails to

state a claim. An agency shall accept a complaint from any aggrieved

employee or applicant for employment who believes that he or she

has been discriminated against by that agency because of race, color,

religion, sex, national origin, age or disabling condition. 29 C.F.R. ��

1614.103, .106(a). The Commission's federal sector case precedent has

long defined an "aggrieved employee" as one who suffers a present harm

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

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

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

Here, complainant claimed that a manager threatened him with employment

termination. However, the record contains no evidence reflecting

any concrete agency action. Therefore, we agree with the agency that

complainant has failed to show a harm or loss to a term, condition or

privilege of employment as a consequence of the manager's threatening

remark.

Regarding complainant's claim that he was denied official time to

represent his co-workers as a Union Steward. The Commission has

repeatedly found that an agency is required to address EEO complaints

only when filed by an �aggrieved� person, that is, one who has suffered

direct, personal deprivation at the hands of the employer. See Paula

Quinones v. Department of Defense, EEOC Request No. 05920051 (March 12,

1992). The employer's act must have caused some concrete effect on the

complainant's employment status. Complainant's representation of other

employees through an employee resource group is not sufficiently tied

to his employment status with the agency to state a claim. See Morman

v. Department of the Air Force, EEOC Request No. 01964629 (March 17,

1997). Therefore, we do not find that the alleged incident rendered

complainant an �aggrieved� employee.

Finally, a review of the record reflects that the matters in question are

insufficient to support a claim of harassment. See Cobb v. Department

of the Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05970077 (March 13, 1997).

Accordingly, the agency's decision to dismiss the complaint was proper

and 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 6, 2004

__________________

Date