0120090119
06-29-2010
Sherri L. Hayes, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Sherri L. Hayes,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120090119
Agency No. 4K-290-0073-08
DECISION
Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the agency's
decision dated August 20, 2008, 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.
Upon review, the Commission finds that Complainant's complaint was
properly dismissed pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1) for failure
to state a claim.
BACKGROUND
In her complaint dated August 7, 2008, Complainant, a Markup Automation
Clerk at the agency's Columbia Processing & Distribution Center, located
in West Columbia, South Carolina, claimed that she was subjected to
discrimination on the bases of race (African American), sex (female),
and in reprisal for prior EEO activity under Title VII when:
1. Her supervisor (S1), while leading a team meeting, told her team
members that "Y'all need to learn to read!" EEO Complaint, at 1, 3;
2. A coworker told Complainant to ask the supervisor how to key a
particular piece of mail, rather than asking the coworker. Complainant
claims that the coworker was unnecessarily hostile, sarcastic and rude
during the exchange. Id., at 3;
3. S1 put mail in Complainant's mail tray after Complainant had complained
of S1 throwing mail into Complainant's tray in the past, and Complainant
claims that S1's action were an attempt to provoke an adverse reaction
from Complainant. Id., at 1, 3;
4. The Postmaster for the facility, in response to a letter from
Complainant, visited the facility to discuss Complainant's concerns,
but did not do so as promptly as Complainant claims was appropriate
under the circumstances. Id., at 1, 4;
5. Complainant received a letter from a representative on behalf of the
District Manager, which Complainant claims did not address her grievances.
Id., at 4; and
6. Complainant filed a grievance through her union against S1 and seeks
enforcement of the agreement reached through the grievance process. Id.
In its final action, the agency determined that, to the extent Complainant
suffered injuries or distress, those injuries or distress were not caused
by any unlawful agency conduct. Moreover, the agency concluded that its
conduct with respect to Complainant constituted permissible criticism of
her job performance, not harassment. Consequently, the agency determined
that Complainant failed to state a claim.
On appeal, Complainant contends that the activity of her supervisors
has caused her great distress.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
The Commission finds that Complainant fails to state a claim under the
EEOC regulations because she failed to show that she suffered harm or
loss with respect to a term, condition, or privilege of employment for
which there is a remedy. See Diaz v. Department of the Air Force,
EEOC Request No. 05931049 (April 21, 1994). Complainant instead sets
forth a list of complaints about the conduct and management style of
her supervisor and then asserts that such conduct has caused her great
distress.1 These generalized grievances, however, are insufficient to
assert successfully a claim of discrimination. See Goines v. Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs, EEOC Appeal No. 01A54108 (July 20, 2006).
Further, the incidents at issue lack sufficient severity or pervasiveness
necessary to constitute a claim of harassment. See Harris v. Forklift
Systems, Inc., 510 U.S. 17, 21 (1993).
Additionally, Complainant's claims regarding the grievance settlement
are beyond the competency of the Commission. See Lingad v. U.S. Postal
Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01922675 (June 24, 1993). If Complainant
wishes to have her grievance settlement enforced, her union, and not this
Commission, is the proper body to which that request should be directed.
Accordingly, the agency's final action dismissing complainant's complaint
is AFFIRMED.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0610)
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), at 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
77960, Washington, DC 20013. 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 (S0610)
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 (Z0610)
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 from the Court that
the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also
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 with
the Court 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
June 29, 2010
__________________
Date
1 The agency conducted a Workplace Climate Assessment. Several surveyed
employees noted that Complainant provoked many arguments with S1.
Workplace Climate Assessment, at 4, 6.
??
??
??
??
2
0120090119
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0120090119
4
0120090119