Penny H. Mitchell, Complainant,v.Dr. James B. Peake, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMar 13, 2008
0120080476 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 13, 2008)

0120080476

03-13-2008

Penny H. Mitchell, Complainant, v. Dr. James B. Peake, Secretary, Department of Veterans Affairs, Agency.


Penny H. Mitchell,

Complainant,

v.

Dr. James B. Peake,

Secretary,

Department of Veterans Affairs,

Agency.

Appeal No. 0120080476

Agency No. 200406592007102192

DECISION

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

decision dated September 20, 2007, 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. and

the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended,

29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq. In her complaint, complainant alleged that she

was subjected to discrimination on the bases of age (D.O.B. 01/09/50)

and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity under Title VII of the

Civil Rights Act of 1964 when:

1. On May 29, 2006, she was not promoted to the next grade level;

2. On unspecified dates, complainant's supervisor scrutinized her work

performance;

3. On unspecified dates, complainant was threatened to be placed on a

performance improvement plan; and

4. During June 2005, complainant's request to attend Coding Boot Camp

training was denied.

The agency dismissed claim 1 on the grounds of untimely EEO counselor

contact in accordance with EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(2).

Specifically, the agency found that complainant's EEO contact on April

11, 2007 regarding her May 29, 2006 failure to be promoted was beyond

the time limits for counselor contact. The agency dismissed claims 2,

3, and 4 on the grounds that the claims were previously raised through

the agency's negotiated grievance procedure.

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105(a)(1) requires that complaints of

discrimination should be brought to the attention of the Equal Employment

Opportunity Counselor within forty-five (45) days of the date of the

matter alleged to be discriminatory or, in the case of a personnel

action, within forty-five (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 forty-five (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 she was not notified of the

time limits and was not otherwise aware of them, that she did not know

and reasonably should not have known that the discriminatory matter or

personnel action occurred, that despite due diligence she was prevented

by circumstances beyond her control from contacting the Counselor within

the time limits, or for other reasons considered sufficient by the agency

or the Commission.

The record indicates that complainant contacted an EEO counselor on April

11, 2007 regarding her May 29, 2006 failure to be promoted, which was

beyond the time limitation for timely EEO contact. Complainant does

not indicate that she was unaware of the time limits, or that she was

prevented by circumstances beyond her control from timely contacting an

EEO Counselor. Moreover, the agency has provided the Commission with

copies of EEO posters containing relevant counselor contact information

which are posted at complainant's workplace. On appeal, complainant has

failed to provide any explanation for her delay in seeking counseling

regarding claim 1. In that regard, we find that the agency's dismissal

of claim 1 as untimely was proper.

Turning now to claims 2, 3, and 4, the Commission finds that the

agency's dismissal was proper. The regulation set forth at 29 C.F.R. �

1614.107(a)(4) provides that an agency may dismiss a complaint where the

complainant has raised the matter in a negotiated grievance procedure that

permits claims of discrimination. In the instant case, the record shows

that complainant filed a grievance concerning the matters identified

in claims 2, 3, and 4. Additionally, the record shows that under the

terms of the agency's union agreement, employees have the right to raise

matters of alleged discrimination under the statutory procedure or the

negotiated grievance procedure, but not both. As the record indicates

that complainant elected to pursue the matter within the grievance

procedure, we find that the agency properly dismissed claims 2, 3,

and 4 pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(4).

Accordingly, the agency's decision dismissing complainant's complaint

is hereby affirmed for the reasons set forth herein.

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

March 13, 2008

__________________

Date

2

0120080476

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

4

0120080476