Rodney J. Lawver, Appellant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJun 2, 1999
01984230 (E.E.O.C. Jun. 2, 1999)

01984230

06-02-1999

Rodney J. Lawver, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Rodney J. Lawver v. United States Postal Service

01984230

June 2, 1999

Rodney J. Lawver, )

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01984230

) Agency No. 1E-984-0005-98

William J. Henderson, )

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, )

Agency. )

)

DECISION

Appellant filed an appeal with this Commission from a final decision of

the agency concerning his complaint of unlawful employment discrimination

in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,

42 U.S.C. �2000e et seq. The final agency decision was issued on

April 22, 1998. The appeal was postmarked May 12, 1998. Accordingly,

the appeal is timely (see 29 C.F.R. �1614.402(a)), and is accepted in

accordance with EEOC Order No. 960, as amended.

ISSUE PRESENTED

The issue on appeal is whether the agency properly dismissed an allegation

of appellant's complaint on the grounds that it states the same claim

as that pending before or that has been decided by the agency.

BACKGROUND

The record reveals that appellant initiated contact with an EEO Counselor

on December 3, 1997. On February 10, 1998, appellant filed a formal EEO

complaint wherein he alleged that he had been discriminated against on

the bases of his sex (male) and in reprisal for his previous EEO activity

when:

1. On November 14, 1997, he was required to take an unnecessary fitness

for duty examination.

2. On November 15, 1997, he received a letter from the Senior Plant

Manager that contained a refusal to conduct an investigation into

threatening letters sent to appellant through the mail.

3. On December 19, 1997, the Tacoma Plant Manager specified three

additional requirements before he could make a determination that

appellant could return to the Tacoma Processing and Distribution Center.

The record also contains a complaint filed by appellant on August 6,

1996. In that complaint (Agency No. 1E-984-1025-96), appellant alleged

in part that he had been discriminated against when management refused

to investigate incidents of threats and racism made against him by a

coworker.

In its final decision with regard to the instant complaint, the agency

dismissed the second allegation of appellant's complaint on the grounds

that it states the same claim that is pending before or that has

been decided by the agency. According to the agency, this allegation

was accepted for investigation on October 8, 1996, as part of Agency

No. 1E-984-1025-96. Allegations 1 and 3 of the instant complaint were

accepted for investigation.

On appeal, appellant contends that it should have been obvious to agency

officials that the relevant threatening letters were received in April

1997 and September 1997. Appellant notes that these letters could not

have been part of the issue accepted for investigation in October 1996.

In response, the agency asserts that all information submitted by

appellant concerning threatening letters discloses that the letters were

received by appellant in 1996. According to the agency, the letters

raised by appellant in the instant matter concern letters sent by the

Plant Manager in 1997.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(a) provides that the agency shall

dismiss a complaint or a portion of a complaint that states the same claim

that is pending before or has been decided by the agency or Commission.

It has long been established that "identical" does not mean "similar."

The Commission has consistently held that in order for a complaint to be

dismissed as identical, the elements of the complaint must be identical to

the elements of the prior complaint in time, place, incident and parties.

See Jackson v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 01955890 (April 5, 1996).

The agency dismissed the second allegation of the instant complaint

under this provision on the grounds that this allegation stated the

same claim as that in Agency No. 1E-984-1025-96. The previous complaint

filed by appellant also referenced threatening letters sent to appellant.

Appellant, however, maintains that the letters at issue in the instant

complaint are letters that were sent subsequent to the acceptance of

the previous complaint. We find that although the subject matter of

both complaints is similar, the complaints are not identical. We note

that the complaints do not relate to the same event as the alleged

incidents occurred on different dates. While the agency contends that

the threatening letters identified by appellant were received by him

in 1996, and that the letters identified in the present case involve

management's refusal to conduct an investigation, the record indicates,

as stated by appellant, that the threatening letters involved in the

present allegation were received in 1997, and, therefore, are different

than those identified in the prior complaint, which were received in 1996.

These complaints reflect different incidents and therefore they do not

state the same claim. Accordingly, the agency's dismissal of allegation

2 was improper and is REVERSED. Allegation 2 is hereby REMANDED for

further processing in accordance with the Order below.

ORDER (E1092)

The agency is ORDERED to process the remanded allegation in accordance

with 29 C.F.R. �1614.108. The agency shall acknowledge to the appellant

that it has received the remanded allegation within thirty (30) calendar

days of the date this decision becomes final. The agency shall issue to

appellant a copy of the investigative file and also shall notify appellant

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 appellant requests a final decision

without a hearing, the agency shall issue a final decision within sixty

(60) days of receipt of appellant's request.

A copy of the agency's letter of acknowledgment to appellant 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 (K0595)

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 appellant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's

order, the appellant may petition the Commission for enforcement of

the order. 29 C.F.R. �1614.503 (a). The appellant 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. �� 1614.408, 1614.409, and 1614.503 (g). Alternatively,

the appellant 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. �� 1614.408 and 1614.409. 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) (Supp. V 1993). If the

appellant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the

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

See 29 C.F.R. �1614.410.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0795)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the appellant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available

when the previous decision was issued; or

2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,

regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or

3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial

precedential implications.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST

BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this

decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive

a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in

opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider

MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party

WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request

to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.407. All requests and arguments

must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received

by the Commission.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances

have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,

a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the

delay and 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).

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (R0993)

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. It is the position of the Commission that 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. You should be aware, however, that courts in some

jurisdictions have interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner

suggesting that a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR

DAYS from the date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your

civil action is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN

THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision

or to consult an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the

jurisdiction in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)

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:

June 2, 1999

__________________________________

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations