EEOC Appeal 2026001722

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Sector
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Henry S.,1
Complainant,
v.
David Steiner,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Field Areas and Regions),
Agency.
Appeal No. 2026001722
Agency No. 1F-841-00601-26
DECISION
Complainant 	filed 	a timely 	appeal 	with the Equal Employment 	Opportunity
Commission (EEOC or Commission) from the Agency's final decision dated
February 23, 2026, dismissing Complainant’s 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. For the reasons set forth herein, we MODIFY
the Agency’s final decision dismissing Complainant’s complaint.
During the period at issue, Complainant worked for the Agency as a Mail Processing
Clerk in Grand Junction, Colorado. 	On January 22, 2026, Complainant filed a
formal complaint alleging discrimination by the Agency based on race (Caucasian),
1 	This 	case 	has 	been 	randomly 	assigned 	a 	pseudonym 	which 	will 	replace
Complainant’s 	name 	when 	the 	decision 	is 	published 	to 	non-parties 	and 	the
Commission’s website.

2 	2026001722
national origin (white), sex (gender identity), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO
activity. Complaint File at 33.2
In its final decision, the Agency determined that Complainant’s formal complaint
was comprised of the following claims:
On September 27, 2025, Complainant felt forced to resign when:
1) On 	unspecified 	dates, 	management 	failed 	to 	assist 	with 	the
application and processing of Complainant’s Office of Workers’
Compensation Program (OWCP) claim, submitted incorrect and/or
provided misleading information, and subsequently on or around
July 10, 2025, OWCP denied Complainant’s OWCP claim.
2) From August 14, 2025, through August 17, 2025, Complainant was
charged with AWOL. Complaint File at 22-23.
The Agency dismissed claims (1) and (2) for untimely EEO Counselor contact.
Complaint File at 23-24. 	The Agency reasoned that Complainant initiated EEO
contact on November 16, 2025, more than 45 days from the alleged incidents set
forth in claims (1) and (2). Complaint File at 23-24.
The Agency dismissed claim (1) on the alternate grounds of failure to state a claim.
Complaint File at 24-25. 	The Agency reasoned that the matters set forth in claim
(1) are a collateral attack on the Department of Labor’s OWCP process.
The instant appeal followed. On appeal, Complainant, through an attorney, asserts
that the Agency improperly dismissed the formal complaint. 	Complainant asserts
that the Agency’s final decision did not properly frame the claims in the formal
complaint. Complainant’s Brief at 1-4. Regarding claim (1), Complainant asserts
that Agency improperly dismissed this matter as a collateral attack on the OWCP
process. Id. at 6. Specifically, Complainant asserts that Agency management failed
to assist Complainant with the OWCP process and provided misleading information.
Id. at 6, 11. 	Complainant further asserts that a named Agency official created a
hostile work environment consisting of numerous incidents and culminating in
2 Our citations to the Complaint File reference the page number of the pdf document
before us on appeal.

3 	2026001722
Complainant’s constructive discharge. Id. at 4-6. Regarding the Agency’s dismissal
for untimely EEO Counselor contact, Complainant asserts that the Agency’s final
decision incorrectly set forth that Complainant initiated EEO contact on November
16, 2025. 	Complainant, however, asserts that the record reflects that the EEO
contact occurred on October 16, 2025. 	Id. at 8. 	Complainant asserts that the
September 27, 2025, constructive discharge claim occurred within the 45-days
preceding the EEO contact. Id. at 9. Thus, Complainant asserts that the entire hostile
work environment claim was timely raised. Id. at 15.
The Agency’s decision to dismiss a complaint is subject to de novo review by the
Commission, which requires the Commission to examine the record without regard
to the factual and legal determinations of the previous decision maker and issue its
decision 	based 	on 	the Commission’s 	own 	assessment 	of the record 	and 	its
interpretation of the law. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a). The Commission should construe
the complaint in the light most favorable to the complainant and take the complaint’s
allegations as true. 	See Cobb v. Department of the Treasury, EEOC Request No.
05970077 (March 13, 1997). Thus, all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from
the complaint’s allegations must be made in favor of the complainant.
The Agency properly dismissed claim (1) for failure to state a claim. An employee
cannot use the EEO complaint process to lodge a collateral attack on another
proceeding. 	Regarding claim (1), Complainant alleges that Agency management
provided false and misleading information regarding the OWCP process. Complaint
File at 37. The proper forum for Complainant to have raised challenges to actions
which occurred during the OWCP process is within that forum itself. 	It is
inappropriate for Complainant to attempt to use the EEO process to collaterally
attack actions which occurred during the OWCP process. See Complainant v. U.S.
Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal No. 0120140240 (Feb. 21, 2014) (claims concerning
delays in submitting paperwork to OWCP or submitting incomplete of faulty
paperwork constitute a collateral attack on the OWCP process).
However, regarding the remainder of Complainant’s claims, upon review of the
formal complaint and pre-complaint documents, we find Complainant is alleging a
hostile 	work 	environment 	claim 	culminating 	in 	a 	constructive 	discharge.
Complainant alleges that the hostile work environment claim is comprised of various
actions by a named management official including the following matters: issuing
letters to Complainant which threatened recording Complainant as AWOL and/or
being removed from Agency employment and subsequently actually marking

4 	2026001722
Complainant as AWOL on several dates in August 2025.3 Complaint File at 52-53,
67-70. Complainant further asserts that the Agency’s alleged harassment culminated
in a constructive discharge.
We further find that the Agency improperly dismissed the hostile work environment
claim for untimely EEO Counselor contact. 	The Commission has held that
“[b]ecause the incidents that make up a hostile work environment claim collectively
constitute one unlawful employment practice, the entire claim is actionable, as long
as at least one incident that is part of the claim occurred within the filing period.
This includes incidents that occurred outside the filing period that the [Complainant]
knew or should have known were actionable at the time of their occurrence.” EEOC
Compliance Manual, Section 2, Threshold Issues at 2-IV(C)(b) (rev. July 2005)
(citing National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101, 117 (2002)).
The Agency’s final decision sets forth that Complainant initiated EEO contact on
November 16, 2025 (Complaint File at 23). However, the EEO Counselor’s Report
and Notice of Right to File a Formal Complaint set forth that Complainant initiated
EEO contact on October 16, 2025 (Complaint File at 42, 81). The record contains a
resignation notice from Complainant dated September 27, 2025.4 Thus, we find that
at least one incident of the hostile work environment claim, the constructive
discharge, occurred within the 45 days preceding Complainant’s EEO contact on
October 16, 2025. Based on the foregoing, the Agency should not have dismissed
the hostile work environment claim for untimely EEO Counselor contact.
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency’s final decision dismissing claim (1) for the
reason set forth herein. 	However, we REVERSE the Agency’s final decision
dismissing the remainder of Complainant’s complaint, defined herein as a hostile
work environment claim culminating in a constructive discharge and we REMAND
this matter to the Agency for further processing in accordance with the ORDER
below.
3 Complainant asserts that proper medical documentation was provided to the
Agency pertaining to medical restrictions and being absent from work. Complaint
File at 54.
4 The record also contains a Notification of Personnel Action form reflecting that
Complainant resigned effective September 27, 2025.

5 	2026001722
ORDER (E0224)
The Agency is ordered to process the remanded claims in accordance with 29 C.F.R.
§ 1614.108. The Agency shall acknowledge to the Complainant that it has received
the remanded claims within thirty (30) calendar days of the date this decision was
issued. The Agency shall issue to Complainant a copy of the investigative file and
also shall notify Complainant of the appropriate rights within one hundred fifty
(150) calendar days of the date this decision was issued, unless the matter is
otherwise resolved prior to that time. If the Complainant requests a final decision
without a hearing, the Agency shall issue a final decision within sixty (60) days of
receipt of Complainant’s request.
As 	provided 	in 	the statement 	entitled 	“Implementation 	of the Commission's
Decision,” the Agency must send to the Compliance Officer: 1) a copy of the
Agency’s letter of acknowledgment to Complainant, 2) a copy of the Agency’s
notice that transmits the investigative file and notice of rights, and 3) either a copy
of the complainant’s request for a hearing, or a copy of the final agency decision
(“FAD”) if Complainant does not request a hearing.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION’S DECISION (K0719)
Under 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(c) and § 1614.502, compliance with the Commission’s
corrective action is mandatory. Within seven (7) calendar days of the completion of
each ordered corrective action, the Agency shall submit via the Federal Sector EEO
Portal (FedSEP) supporting documents in the digital format required by the
Commission, referencing the compliance docket number under which compliance
was being monitored. Once all compliance is complete, the Agency shall submit via
FedSEP a final compliance report in the digital format required by the Commission.
See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). 	The Agency’s final report must contain supporting
documentation when previously not uploaded, and the Agency must send a copy of
all submissions to the Complainant and his/her representative.
If the Agency does not comply with the Commission’s order, the Complainant may
petition the Commission for enforcement of the order. 	29 C.F.R. § 1614.503(a).
The Complainant 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. §§ 1614.407, 1614.408, and 29 C.F.R. § 1614.503(g).

6 	2026001722
Alternatively, the Complainant 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. §§ 1614.407 and 1614.408. 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) (1994 & Supp. IV 1999). If the Complainant files a civil action, the
administrative 	processing 	of 	the 	complaint, 	including 	any 	petition 	for
enforcement, will be terminated. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409.
Failure by an agency to either file a compliance report or implement any of the orders
set forth in this decision, without good cause shown, may result in the referral of this
matter to the Office of Special Counsel pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.503(f) for
enforcement by that agency.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1125)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider this appellate decision if
Complainant or the Agency submits a written request that contains arguments or
evidence that 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 for reconsideration must be filed with EEOC’s Office of Federal Sector
(OFS) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision. 	If the party
requesting reconsideration elects to file a statement or brief in support of the request,
that 	statement 	or 	brief 	must 	be 	filed 	together 	with 	the 	request 	for
reconsideration. 	A party shall have twenty (20) calendar days from receipt of
another party’s request for reconsideration within which to submit a brief or
statement in opposition. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity
Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at Chap. 9 § VII.B
(Aug. 5, 2015).
Complainant should submit their request for reconsideration, and any statement or
brief in support of their request, via the EEOC Public Portal, which can be found at
https://publicportal.eeoc.gov/Portal/Login.aspx.

7 	2026001722
Alternatively, Complainant can submit their request and arguments to the Director,
Office of Federal Sector, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, via regular
mail addressed to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail
addressed to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. In the absence of a legible
postmark, a complainant’s request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if OFS
receives it by mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period.
See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604.
An agency’s request for reconsideration must be submitted in digital format via the
EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). Either
party’s request and/or statement or brief in opposition must also include proof of
service on the other party, unless Complainant files their request via the EEOC
Public Portal, in which case no proof of service is required.
Failure to file within the 30-day time period will result in dismissal of the party’s
request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented
the timely filing of the request. 	Any supporting documentation must be
submitted together with the 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(f).
COMPLAINANT’S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (T0124)
This decision affirms the Agency’s final decision/action in part, but it also requires
the Agency to continue its administrative processing of a portion of your complaint.
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 on
both that portion of your complaint which the Commission has affirmed and that
portion of the complaint which has been remanded for continued administrative
processing. 	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 your appeal with the Commission, until such time as the Agency issues its final
decision on your complaint. 	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 their 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.

8 	2026001722
RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z0815)
If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so,
you may request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without
paying these fees or costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent
you in the civil action, you may request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You
must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or appointment of an
attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The court has the sole
discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter the
time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant’s
Right to File a Civil Action for the specific time limits).
.
FOR THE COMMISSION:
__ T. Gimbrere ________ Chaudhry’s signature
T. Gimbrere, Acting Director
Office of Federal Sector
September 17, 2026
Date