Nitza Persinger, Complainant,v.Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary, Department of Defense, (Education Activity), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionNov 3, 2004
01A44080_r (E.E.O.C. Nov. 3, 2004)

01A44080_r

11-03-2004

Nitza Persinger, Complainant, v. Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary, Department of Defense, (Education Activity), Agency.


Nitza Persinger v. Department of Defense (Education Activity)

01A44080

November 3, 2004

.

Nitza Persinger,

Complainant,

v.

Donald H. Rumsfeld,

Secretary,

Department of Defense,

(Education Activity),

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A44080

Agency No. EU-FY04-07

DECISION

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

decision dated April 29, 2004, 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. In her

complaint, complainant alleged that she was subjected to discrimination

on the basis of race (Hispanic) when:

On September 5, 2003, complainant learned that the Case Study Committee

(CSC) Chairperson, Person A, discontinued the clerk's position to

which complainant had been performing collateral duties along with her

positions as GS-102-04, Educational Aide (Special Education), and there

was no longer a need for her to occupy the office space and/or use the

equipment that had been available for the duties of the clerk position;

On September 2, 2003, complainant learned that another Special Education

Aid was given additional hours to work and complainant was not;

On August 19, 2003, complainant was informed that she was to report to

school on August 25, 2003. She alleges that she had assumed that her

reporting date would be September 2, 2003, the same date for students,

and because she was not given ample notification of her reporting date,

she was unable to make appropriate childcare arrangements and she missed

the Special Education Aids training that was held on August 27, 2003,

eight days after she had become aware of the reporting date;

In May 2003, complainant became aware that the agency had a policy where

a teacher can be hired and granted one year to complete the certification

process. Complainant claimed that sometime between April and May 2003,

[Person B], Principal of Robinson Barracks Elementary School, told

her that a teaching position for the 2003/2004 school year required

a certified teacher, and that if she were not certified, she was not

qualified for the position.

The agency dismissed issues (1), (2) and (3) pursuant to the regulation

set forth at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1), for failure to state a claim.

With regard to issue (1), the agency noted that complainant had been

performing the clerk duties as collateral work and that she received

no additional pay for performing these duties, although she received

additional experience in performing the duties. The agency stated that

because these were collateral duties, there was no decrease in pay when

the duties were removed. The agency noted that when the clerk duties

were removed, complainant was assigned as a learning impaired aid in the

mornings and as a preschool aid in the afternoons, working the full forty

hours per pay period performing the duties of an Educational Aid, as she

was hired to do. The agency stated although it was no longer necessary

for her to occupy the office space or use the equipment of the clerk

position, she was given a desk in the preschool room where she was an aid.

The agency noted that the clerk position for the CSC was abolished and was

not filled by a person of a different national origin than complainant.

With regard to issue (2), the agency noted that Person B confirmed that

the Bavarian School District had provided the school with an additional

five hours per week (10 per pay period) of employment for special

education aids. Person B acknowledged that he offered another educational

aid extra hours because that employee was working twenty-five hours, which

was less than the forty hours per pay period that complainant was working.

With regard to issue (3), the agency stated that management has no control

as to whether or not complainant's personal responsibilities were met

outside of the school in order for complainant to have reported to work

on August 25, 2003. The agency stated that complainant did not show that

she was disciplined or reprimanded for not attending the training or for

not reporting to school on the day in question. The agency stated that

complainant has not shown that she suffered any disciplinary action or

adverse employment action, or that management denied her the right to

attend the training offered on August 27, 2003.

With regard to issue (4), the agency dismissed this issue pursuant to

the regulation set forth at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(2), for untimely EEO

Counselor contact. The agency stated that even if complainant learned

of the policy on the last day of May 2003, she failed to contact an

EEO Counselor within forty-five days of May 31, 2003. The agency noted

that complainant did not initiate EEO contact until September 11, 2003.

Additionally, the agency noted that complainant did not identify a

vacancy announcement to which she sought employment or that an actual

vacancy existed.

Upon review, we find that the agency improperly dismissed issue (1)

for failure to state a claim. The Commission has previously held that

a collateral duty assignment is a condition or benefit of employment.

Paul v. Department of Defense, EEOC Appeal No. 01924516 (November 24,

1992). For that reason, the Commission finds that the alleged removal

of complainant's collateral duties as a clerk for the CSC was a personal

loss which rendered complainant aggrieved.

With regard to issue (2), we find that in alleging that she was not

given additional hours to work while another aide received additional

hours, complainant has stated a cognizable harm. We find that the

agency's reason for offering the additional hours to the other aide,

inappropriately addresses the merits of this claim in a procedural

decision.

With regard to issue (3), we find that this issue was properly dismissed

for failure to state a claim. Specifically, complainant failed to show

that the agency's late reporting notice resulted in a harm, or loss to

a term, condition or privilege of employment for which there is a remedy.

With regard to issue (4), we find that this issue was properly dismissed

for untimely EEO Counselor contact. We note that complainant mentions

that she was interested in a position as a Learning Impaired aide in

2002 but was told that she was not eligible because she did not have

her certificate. Additionally, complainant states that in April or May

2003, she approached the principal about becoming a full time teacher

and expressed an interest in applying for a vacancy the school would

have in 2003-2004 for a preschool teacher. She states that Person B

told her that the position would require a teacher to be certified.

Complainant states that in May 2003, she learned that the agency has a

policy by which they can hire a teacher who is not certified, as long

as the teacher completes the certification process prior to the end of

the school year for which he/she is hired. The record reveals that the

latest date of discrimination with regard to issue (4) was May 31, 2003;

however, complainant failed to contact an EEO Counselor until September

11, 2003, which is beyond the applicable limitations period.

Accordingly, the agency's decision to dismiss issues (1) and (2)

is REVERSED and these issues are REMANDED to the agency for further

processing in accordance with the Order below. The agency's decision

to dismiss issues (3) and (4) is AFFIRMED.

ORDER (E0900)

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

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 (K0501)

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 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 (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 (T0900)

This decision affirms the agency's final decision/action in part, but it

also requires the agency to continue its administrative processing of a

portion of your complaint. 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 on both that portion

of your complaint which the Commission has affirmed and that portion

of the complaint which has been remanded for continued administrative

processing. 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 your appeal with the Commission, until

such time as the agency issues its final decision on your complaint.

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

November 3, 2004

__________________

Date