Manuel E. Norat, Complainant,v.William M. Daley, Secretary, Department of Commerce, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionFeb 10, 2000
01a01216 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 10, 2000)

01a01216

02-10-2000

Manuel E. Norat, Complainant, v. William M. Daley, Secretary, Department of Commerce, Agency.


Manuel E. Norat, )

Complainant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01A01216

) Agency No. 99-63-00697D

William M. Daley, )

Secretary, )

Department of Commerce, )

Agency. )

______________________________)

DECISION

The instant matter is being processed following the implementation of

a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) entered into by the agency, the

Bureau of the Census, and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission.<1> The MOU was entered into in order to process complaints

arising from the 2000 Decennial Census more effectively and efficiently.

Pursuant to the MOU, individuals file their complaints directly with

the Commission. The Commission, through its Washington, D.C. Field

Office, then conducts an early assessment of complaints and neutral

evaluation of cases. The Washington, D.C. Field Office of the Commission

establishes a record of the complaint by obtaining an affidavit from the

complainant and by contacting an agency official to obtain the necessary

information on the complaint. Based on the record established by the

Washington, D.C. Field Office, the Washington, D.C. Field Office will:

(1) notify the agency that the individual has elected not to file a

formal complaint; (2) issue a decision dismissing the complaint and

notify the complainant or his or her right to appeal the decision to

the Office of Federal Operations; (3) conduct settlement negotiations;

or (4) notify the complainant that the complaint has been accepted and

forward the complaint to the agency for further investigation.

In the instant matter the Washington, D.C. Field Office of the Commission

issued a decision dated September 8, 1999, dismissing the instant

complaint for failing to state a claim. In the complaint complainant

claimed that he was discriminated against on the bases of sex and

retaliation when he was harassed by a female coworker (Coworker A).

Based on the complaint itself and the affidavit by the complainant

gathered by the EEOC during the EEOC's neutral and independent evaluation

of the complaint, the Commission agrees with the earlier decision finding

that complainant's claim of discrimination is insufficient to state a

claim and is properly dismissed for failing to state a claim pursuant

to 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37656 (to be codified and hereinafter cited as

29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1)). Complainant claimed that she was harassed

when Coworker A (for a period of approximately 2 months): made false

accusations of physical and verbal threats by complainant; made false

allegations that complainant made false and threatening phone calls

to Coworker A; made false allegations that complainant broke into and

entered Coworker A's voice mail; had a consistent condescending attitude;

made consistent inappropriate comments (tone of voice); was consistently

dismissive; and assigned complainant demeaning clerical duties/busy work.

Complainant also claimed that he was denied access by Coworker A to

necessary work resources.

The Commission finds that the incidents in the complaint, when taken as a

whole, do not rise to the level necessary to state a claim of harassment.

Cobb v. Department of the Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05970077 (Mar. 13,

1997). Even if the incidents described by complainant were sufficiently

severe or frequent, the Commission agrees with the previous decision's

conclusion that complainant has failed to show that the incidents at

issue were related to his sex. Complainant also has not shown that

any incident was in retaliation for any prior protected activity by

complainant. Therefore, we find that the instant complaint is properly

dismissed for failing to state a claim pursuant to � 1614.107(a)(1).

The Washington, D.C. Field Office's decision dismissing the complaint

is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M1199)

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). 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 (S1199)

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:

Feb 10, 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

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.