Ronald D. Cole, Complainant,v.F. Whitten Peters, Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 30, 2000
01a03643 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 30, 2000)

01a03643

08-30-2000

Ronald D. Cole, Complainant, v. F. Whitten Peters, Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency.


Ronald D. Cole v. Department of the Air Force

01A03643

August 30, 2000

.

Ronald D. Cole,

Complainant,

v.

F. Whitten Peters,

Secretary,

Department of the Air Force,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A03643

Agency No. 9V1M00254

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from an agency

decision dated March 23, 2000, dismissing 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.<1> In his complaint,

complainant alleged that he was subjected to discrimination on the basis

of race (Black) when:

On January 14, 2000, complainant was verbally and physically abused by

a supervisor.

The agency dismissed complainant's complaint pursuant to the regulation

set forth at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999) (to be codified and

hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1)), for failure

to state a claim. The agency noted that complainant claimed that on

January 14, 2000, his supervisor raised his voice when complainant

confronted the supervisor about an audit, told complainant to get out

of his office, and placed his hand on complainant's back and pushed

complainant out the door. The agency stated that comments alone do

not result in a harm to a term, condition, or privilege of employment.

The agency concluded that complainant failed to show that he suffered

a harm as a result of a concrete agency action and thus, dismissed his

complainant for failure to state a claim.

On appeal, complainant states that he suffered a harm in that he was

humiliated by his supervisor's actions. Complainant states that as a

result of the January 14, 2000 incident, he suffered emotional stress

and now fears going near his supervisor's shop. In addition, complainant

states that his supervisor's behavior constituted harassment.

Upon review of the record, we find that complainant failed to state a

cognizable claim of employment discrimination. Specifically, we note that

an assertion of emotional or mental stress alone is insufficient to render

an employee aggrieved. In addition, complainant alleges that the January

14, 2000 incident constituted harassment. The Commission has repeatedly

found that claims of a few isolated incidents of alleged harassment

usually are not sufficient to state a harassment claim. See Phillips

v. Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Request No. 05960030 (July 12,

1996); Banks v. Health and Human Services, EEOC Request No. 05940481

(February 16, 1995). Moreover, the Commission has repeatedly found

that remarks or comments unaccompanied by a concrete agency action

usually are not a direct and personal deprivation sufficient to render

an individual aggrieved for the purposes of Title VII. See Backo

v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05960227 (June 10,

1996); Henry v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No.05940695

(February 9, 1995). Thus, we find that the single incident on January

14, 2000, does not state a claim of harassment.

Accordingly, the agency's decision to dismiss complainant's complaint

was proper and is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0300)

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 64

Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter referred

to as 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 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 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).

COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0400)

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:

August 30, 2000

____________________________

Date Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision

was received within five (5) calendar days of mailing. I certify that

the decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative

(if applicable), and the agency on:

_______________ __________________________

Date 1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's

federal sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations

apply to all federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in

the administrative process. Consequently, the Commission will apply

the revised regulations found at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where

applicable, in deciding the present appeal. The regulations, as amended,

may also be found at the Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.