[Redacted], Dania S., 1 Complainant,v.Janet L. Yellen, Secretary, Department of the Treasury (Internal Revenue Service), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Aug 30, 2021

Appeal No. 2021002658 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 30, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Dania S.,1 Complainant, v. Janet L. Yellen, Secretary, Department of the Treasury (Internal Revenue Service), Agency. Appeal No. 2021002658 Agency No. IRS-21-0159-F DECISION Complainant filed a timely appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) from the Agency's decision dated March 9, 2021, 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. BACKGROUND At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as an Internal Revenue Agent, 0512, GS-13 at the Agency’s Internal Revenue Service facility in Pontiac, Michigan. On February 10, 2021, Complainant filed a formal complaint. The Agency characterized the complaint as alleging that the Agency subjected Complainant to discrimination on the bases of race (Black U.S. American), sex (female), color (Brown), and age (54) when: 1. On or about December 11, 2020, the Agency denied multiple requests for a Wi-Fi hotspot portable internet device; and 2. On several dates, she was subjected to various acts of harassment, including: a. In October 2020, her first level supervisor threatened her, stating, “When I finish 1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant’s name when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission’s website. 2021002658 2 with you … you will never go over my head to complain” and directed her never to go to the Territory Manager again; b. On October 28, 2020, the Agency conducted a three-hour workload review with her by Skype when she had no access to the internet, and during the call, her manager told her to shut up. The Agency dismissed these claims pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(4) on the grounds that she had already raised these matters using the grievance process. Complainant filed the instant appeal, but no supporting brief. On appeal, the Agency contends Complainant has not provided argument or evidence disputing the propriety of the Agency’s formal dismissal, and that the formal complaint raises matters raised first in a negotiated grievance procedure which allows for claims of discrimination. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. § 114.107(a)(4) provides that the agency shall dismiss a complaint where the complainant has raised the matter in a negotiated grievance procedure that permits allegations of discrimination and § 1614.301 indicates that the complainant has elected to pursue the non-EEO process. EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. § 1614.301(a) states that when a person is employed by an agency subject to 5 U.S.C. § 7121(d) and is covered by a collective bargaining agreement that permits claims of discrimination to be raised in a negotiated grievance procedure, a person wishing to file a complaint or grievance on a matter of alleged employment discrimination must elect to raise the matter under either part 1614 or the negotiated grievance procedure, but not both. An aggrieved employee who files a grievance with an agency whose negotiated agreement permits the acceptance of grievances which allege discrimination may not thereafter file a complaint on the same matter under this part 1614 irrespective of whether the agency has informed the individual of the need to elect or whether the grievance has raised an issue of discrimination. Complainant was employed by an agency subject to 5 U.S.C. § 7121(d). Complainant was also covered by a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) that permitted allegations of discrimination to be raised in the negotiated grievance procedure. (Complaint File, pp. 70-72). However, it does not appear that the issues raised by Complainant in the formal complaint are entirely the same as those raised in her grievance. On November 18, 2020, Complainant filed a grievance alleging retaliation against her manager (Manager) related to a three-hour Skype/telephone conference with Manager that occurred on October 28, 2020. (Complaint File, pp. 38-39). Subsequently, Complainant amended her grievance on December 17, 2020 to add additional claims related to Complainant’s November 30, 2020 request for a new Wi-Fi device, which Manager later denied. Complainant further alleged issues relating to time, attendance, and leave that occurred on December 11, 2020, December 15, 2020, and December 16, 2020. (Complaint File, pp. 40-42). 2021002658 3 Complainant initiated EEO counselor contact on January 6, 2021 while awaiting her grievance hearing. During counseling, Complainant raised several issues that were also addressed in her grievance. (Complaint File, pp. 79-98). However, she noted a new triggering event occurred on December 23, 2020, when Manager conducted a Workload Review while Complainant had no access to communicate online because she had not yet received a new Wi-Fi device. (Complaint File, pp. 85, 92, 94-95). After no resolution was reached during informal counseling, Complainant filed her formal complaint on February 10, 2021. In her formal complaint, Complainant alleged discrimination based on age, race, color, and sex when: 1) a Workload Review was conducted without her input during a time when she had no access to obtain online data; and 2) this Workload Review became official on January 12, 2021 and she received a written directive on February 4, 2021. She also provided “background information” that raised the October 28, 2020 Skype call mentioned in her grievance and other incidents that occurred between October 2020 and February 2021. (Complaint File, pp. 109-111). The Agency redefined Complainant’s claims in its Final Agency Decision so as not to include the newer Workload Review issue and then proceeded to dismiss her complaint on the grounds that her complaint raised the same issues as her grievance. This is clearly not the case as the Workload Review in question had not even occurred when Complainant amended her grievance on December 17, 2020 and this event was not addressed in either her original or amended grievance. Therefore, it was improper for the Agency to dismiss Complainant’s formal complaint because the formal complaint does not contain the same events raised in her grievance. CONCLUSION The Agency's final decision dismissing the formal complaint is REVERSED and REMANDED for further processing as set forth below. ORDER (E0618) The Agency is ordered to process the remanded claims 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 was issued. 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 was issued, 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. As provided in the statement entitled "Implementation of the Commission's Decision,” the Agency must send to the Compliance Officer: 1) a copy of the Agency’s letter of acknowledgment to Complainant, 2) a copy of the Agency’s notice that transmits the investigative file and notice of rights, and 3) either a copy of the complainant’s request for a hearing, a copy of complainant’s request for a FAD, or a statement from the agency that it did not receive a response from complainant by the end of the election period. 2021002658 4 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION’S DECISION (K0719) Under 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(c) and § 1614.502, compliance with the Commission’s corrective action is mandatory. Within seven (7) calendar days of the completion of each ordered corrective action, the Agency shall submit via the Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP) supporting documents in the digital format required by the Commission, referencing the compliance docket number under which compliance was being monitored. Once all compliance is complete, the Agency shall submit via FedSEP a final compliance report in the digital format required by the Commission. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). The Agency’s final report must contain supporting documentation when previously not uploaded, and the Agency must send a copy of all submissions to the Complainant and his/her representative. 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. Failure by an agency to either file a compliance report or implement any of the orders set forth in this decision, without good cause shown, may result in the referral of this matter to the Office of Special Counsel pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.503(f) for enforcement by that agency. STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL RECONSIDERATION (M0920) The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider this appellate decision if Complainant or the Agency submits a written request that contains arguments or evidence that 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 for reconsideration must be filed with EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision. If the party requesting reconsideration elects to file a statement or brief in support of the request, that statement or brief must be filed together with the request for reconsideration. 2021002658 5 A party shall have twenty (20) calendar days from receipt of another party’s request for reconsideration within which to submit a brief or statement in opposition. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at Chap. 9 § VII.B (Aug. 5, 2015). Complainant should submit his or her request for reconsideration, and any statement or brief in support of his or her request, via the EEOC Public Portal, which can be found at https://publicportal.eeoc.gov/Portal/Login.aspx Alternatively, Complainant can submit his or her request and arguments to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, via regular mail addressed to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail addressed to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. In the absence of a legible postmark, a complainant’s request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if OFO receives it by mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604. An agency’s request for reconsideration must be submitted in digital format via the EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). Either party’s request and/or statement or brief in opposition must also include proof of service on the other party, unless Complainant files his or her request via the EEOC Public Portal, in which case no proof of service is required. Failure to file within the 30-day time period will result in dismissal of the party’s request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation must be submitted together with the 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. 2021002658 6 RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0815) If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant’s Right to File a Civil Action for the specific time limits). FOR THE COMMISSION: ______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden’s signature Carlton M. Hadden, Director Office of Federal Operations August 30, 2021 Date