Mary June Bjork, Complainant,v.Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southwest Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 16, 2011
0120111231 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 16, 2011)

0120111231

12-16-2011

Mary June Bjork, Complainant, v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Southwest Area), Agency.




Mary June Bjork,

Complainant,

v.

Patrick R. Donahoe,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service

(Southwest Area),

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120111231

Agency No. 1G761000311

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the Agency's

decision dated December 2, 2010, 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.

Upon review, the Commission finds that Complainant's complaint was

improperly dismissed pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(1) for failure

to state a claim.

BACKGROUND

At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked

as a Distribution Clerk at the Agency’s P&DC facility in Lubbock, Texas.

On November 17, 2010, Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging

that the Agency subjected her to discrimination on the bases of sex

(female) and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity under Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when, on October 4 and 15, 2010, a bid

was taken away from her. In her pleadings, Complainant states:

In the past years as long as I can remember, only women and four

that know of, have been given negative employment actions and no men.

In this case management is maintaining my negative job employment status

by denying me the job bids (BID# 95555497, 70069862) that I won, where I

would have returned to active duty. This is harassment/retaliation for

prior EEO activity and gender (sex) related in that this has recently

only happened to other women and not men.

In its final decision, the Agency indicated that Complainant quite

specifically alleges discrimination when she was the successful bidder

on two jobs (#95555497 and #70069862) which were taken away from her in

accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) (dated September 1,

1987) between the American Postal Worker's Union and the Postal Service.

According to the Agency, the proper forum for Complainant to have raised

her challenge to decisions made with regard to the application of the

above referenced MOU would have been the grievance procedure for the

National Agreement. The Agency asserts it is inappropriate to now

attempt to use the EEO process to seek collateral enforcement of a

process governed by the negotiated National Agreement.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Despite the Agency’s findings to the contrary, Complainant has alleged

an injury or harm to a term, condition, or privilege of employment for

which there is a remedy. See Diaz v. Dep’t of the Air Force, EEOC

Request No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994). Further, while the Commission

has held that an employee cannot use the EEO complaint process to lodge a

collateral attack on another proceeding, the record shows that Complainant

is not specifically challenging the Agency’s grievance process or its

MOU, but instead the Agency's purported, discriminatory application of

its MOU by its management. Thus, Complainant states a claim and is not

collaterally attacking the grievance process.

Moreover, the Agency’s argument concerning its compliance with the terms

of the MOU when it removed Complainant’s bid improperly addresses the

merits of Complainant’s complaint without a proper investigation as

required by the regulations. We find that the Agency’s articulated

reason for the action in dispute is irrelevant to the procedural issue of

whether she has stated a justiciable claim under Title VII. See Osborne

v. Dep’t of the Treasury, EEOC Request No. 05960111 (July 19, 1996);

Lee v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Request No. 05930220 (Aug. 12, 1993);

Ferrazzoli v. U.S. Postal Serv., EEOC Request No. 05910642 (Aug. 15,

1991).

Accordingly, the Agency's final decision dismissing Complainant's

complaint is REVERSED and the complaint is hereby REMANDED to the

Agency for further processing in accordance with this decision and the

Order below.

ORDER (E0610)

The Agency is ordered to process the remanded claim in accordance with

29 C.F.R. § 1614.108 et seq. 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 (K0610)

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 77960, Washington, DC

20013. 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 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) (1994 & Supp. IV 1999).

If the Complainant files a civil action, the administrative processing of

the complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated.

See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0610)

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), at 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

77960, Washington, DC 20013. 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 (R0610)

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 (Z0610)

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 from the Court that

the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also

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 with

the Court 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 16, 2011

__________________

Date

2

0120111231

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

2

0120111231