Trumilla Foreman, Complainant,v.John W. Carlin, Archivist of the United States, National Archives and Records Administration, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJan 5, 2000
01991028 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 5, 2000)

01991028

01-05-2000

Trumilla Foreman, Complainant, v. John W. Carlin, Archivist of the United States, National Archives and Records Administration, Agency.


Trumilla Foreman v. National Archives and Records Administration

01991028

January 5, 2000

Trumilla Foreman, )

Complainant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01991028

) Agency No. NARA 9824

John W. Carlin, )

Archivist of the United States, )

National Archives and Records )

Administration, )

Agency. )

________________________________)

DECISION

On November 2, 1998, the complainant filed a timely appeal with this

Commission from a final agency decision (FAD) dated October 7, 1998,

pertaining to her 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. and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of

1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq.<1> In her complaint,

the complainant alleged that she was subjected to discrimination on the

bases of race (Black), sex (female), disability (mental and physical),

reprisal and age (over 40) when:

she was sexually harassed by her former first-line supervisor;

she was treated differently than others when she requested sick leave

for herself or her sick child;

she was often not accommodated even though she brought her disabilities

to the attention of her supervisors;

she was treated differently than white male coworkers in terms of rights

and equal opportunities in terms of work assignments for advancement

and proper resources for job performance;

she was not given the same coaching and proper supervision that male

coworkers were afforded;

she was forced to work in and subjected to a hostile and distressful

workplace environment;

she was unfairly given a proposal of removal;

she was falsely accused of pushing the proposing official at a copy

machine in May 1998;

the agency failed to properly investigate her appeal/grievance of the

unfair proposal of removal.

By letter dated October 7, 1998, the agency informed the complainant

that it accepted claims (1-3) for investigation and did not accept

claims (4-6) for investigation because they had not yet been counseled.

The agency dismissed claims (7-9) pursuant to EEOC Regulation 64 Fed.

Reg. 37,644, 37, 656 (1999)(to be codified and hereinafter referred

to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(4)), because the complainant elected to

bring these claims before the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) on

July 27, 1998, and had raised them before the Office of Special Counsel

(OSC) on or about May 28, 1998.

The instant appeal followed. By letter dated December 28, 1998, the

agency informed the complainant that they were rescinding the October

7, 1998 letter because MSPB had dismissed her case without prejudice

and OSC had notified her that it was terminating their investigation.

The agency stated that they were consolidating claims (7-9) into one

allegation (concerning her removal which was effective June 26, 1998)

and accepting it for investigation with claims (1-3). The agency again

informed the complainant that claims (4-6) had not been counseled and

were still not accepted.

Subsequently, by letter dated February 3, 1999, the agency clarified its

position in its processing of the complainant's complaint. It again

stated that claims (1-3) and consolidated claims (7-9) were accepted

for investigation. It further stated that claims (4-6) were in the

process of being counseled which had to occur prior to a determination

of whether to accept them or not.

Based on the evidence currently before the Commission we find that all of

the complainant's claims in her complaint are currently being processed.

Therefore, because no claims remain dismissed, there is nothing further

for the Commission to review. See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37659 (1999)(to

be codified at 29 C.F.R. � 1614.401).

The instant appeal is DISMISSED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M1199)

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). 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).

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0993)

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:

Jan 5, 2000

_____________________________

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting 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:

_________________________ __________________________

1 On 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.