Steven A. Miller, Appellant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionApr 2, 1999
01982157 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 2, 1999)

01982157

04-02-1999

Steven A. Miller, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Steven A. Miller v. United States Postal Service

01982157

April 2, 1999

Steven A. Miller, )

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01982157

) Agency No. 4-G-780-0249-97

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 December

29, 1997. The appeal was postmarked January 24, 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 appellant's

complaint on the grounds that he failed to accept a certified offer of

full relief.

BACKGROUND

Appellant initiated contact with an EEO Counselor on July 9, 1997.

On September 25, 1997, appellant filed a formal EEO complaint wherein he

alleged that he was discriminated against in reprisal for his previous EEO

activity when on June 5, 1997, he was directed to take a telephone call

off his travel voucher. Appellant requested as relief that he be free

from a hostile work environment with regard to the daily screening of

his work and documents, and that he be treated fairly and with respect.

On November 17, 1997, the agency extended to appellant a settlement offer,

which the agency subsequently certified as full relief. The agency

stated that failure to accept the offer within 30 days of its receipt

would result in the dismissal of the complaint. The offer provided

that appellant would receive (1) compensation of $8 for one-half of the

telephone call made on May 28, 1997, since it was a partial business call;

(2) compensation of $6.20 for the return mileage to his residence on

May 30, 1997; (3) appellant's consideration of using agency owned or

leased phone lines when placing business phone calls; (4) appellant's

understanding that management has the responsibility to review and ensure

that travel vouchers are completed properly and within regulations; and

(5) appellant's understanding that management is committed to treating him

with dignity and respect as well as all other employees and he will not

be retaliated against as a result of filing the instant EEO complaint.

In its final decision dated December 29, 1997, the agency dismissed

the complaint on the grounds of failure to accept a certified offer of

full relief. The agency stated that appellant received the certified

offer of full relief on November 20, 1997, and declined the offer by

letter dated December 8, 1997.

On appeal, appellant states that the instant complaint was filed

shortly after the agency adopted the EEOC Administrative Judge's

recommended decision in Agency No. 4-G-780-1018-95 finding that he had

been discriminated against in reprisal for his previous EEO activity.

Appellant maintains that the alleged discrimination in the instant

complaint constitutes a violation of the remedial actions set forth by

the Administrative Judge. Appellant notes that the remedial relief was

intended to prevent further retaliation against him by his supervisor.

According to appellant, the agency's offer to treat him with dignity

and respect provides him nothing more than that to which he already

is entitled. Appellant argues that the agency's failure to prevent

retaliation against him warrants an award of compensatory damages.

Appellant also requests that he be reimbursed for business and mileage

expenses denied by his supervisor.

In response, the agency asserts that appellant's contentions on appeal are

not related to the complaint at issue, but rather concern the complaint

in Agency No. 4-G-780-1018-95.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

The decision to dismiss a complaint for failure to accept full relief

should be made by the agency when an appellant refuses to accept

an offer of full relief made in compliance with EEOC Regulation 29

C.F.R. �1614.107(h). Under the regulation, the agency must provide

written certification to the appellant that its offer constitutes full

relief and that failure to accept the offer within thirty days of its

receipt may result in dismissal of the complaint. When an appellant

refuses the offer, the agency may dismiss the complaint.

When an appellant appeals, objecting to the dismissal of a complaint under

the above provisions, the Commission will uphold the agency's dismissal

if 1) the certification and offer were properly made in accordance with

the regulation, and 2) the offer constitutes full relief given the facts

of the case.

In this case, the record shows that the certification was made by an

official authorized to certify that an offer constitutes full relief.

The certification accompanied the offer. Therefore, the agency's

offer satisfied the procedural requirements of a certified offer of

full relief.

Full relief must be evaluated in terms of whether it includes everything

to which the complainant would be entitled if a finding of discrimination

were entered with respect to all of the allegations in the complaint, See

Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405 (1975); Merriell v. Department

of Transportation, EEOC Request No. 05890596 (August 10, 1989), and

it must be specifically tailored to cure the particular source of the

identified discrimination and minimize the chance of its recurrence.

In Albemarle, the Court held that the purpose of Title VII is to

make victims whole. 422 U.S. at 418-19. This requires eliminating

the particular unlawful employment practice complained of, as well as

restoring the victim to the position he or she would have occupied were

it not for the unlawful discrimination. Id. at 420-21.

Appellant alleged that he was subjected to discrimination when he was

directed to take charges for a telephone call off his travel voucher.

We find that although the agency's settlement offer satisfied the

procedural requirements of a certified offer of full relief, the offer may

not provide appellant with full relief because he requested compensatory

damages, albeit for the first time on appeal. Given that appellant

has made such a claim, the agency must request that appellant provide

objective evidence linking those damages to the adverse actions at issue

herein. See Carle v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 01922369

(January 5, 1993).

Finally, we note that this decision does not, for any purpose, decide

the merit of appellant's allegations of discrimination. We merely find

that in the event appellant was subjected to discrimination with regard

to his allegation, the existing record does not conclusively establish

that the agency's offer would place him in the position he would have

occupied absent the alleged discriminatory action, at a minimum, due to

the outstanding issue of compensatory damages. Accordingly, the agency's

dismissal of the complaint is REVERSED. This complaint is hereby REMANDED

for further processing in accordance with the Order below.

ORDER (E1092)

The agency is ORDERED to process the remanded allegations in accordance

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

that it has received the remanded allegations 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:

April 2, 1999

DATE Ronnie Blumenthal, Director

Office of Federal Operations