2025003942•EEOC Appeal 2025003942
Texte intégral
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Sector P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Tiffani G.,1 Complainant, v. Troy E. Meink, Secretary, Department of the Air Force, Agency. Appeal No. 2025003942 Agency No. 9Q0R2400606F25 DECISION Complainant filed an appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission), pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(a), from the Agency’s July 21, 2025, final decision concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint of 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. and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq. For the following reasons, the Commission AFFIRMS the Agency’s final decision finding no discrimination. At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Specialist at the Agency’s Hickam Air Force Base in Honolulu, Hawaii. On August 14, 2024, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging the Agency subjected her to discrimination based on national origin (El Salvador) when Complainant’s supervisor, the Sexual Assault Response 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 2025003942 Coordinator (SARC), told Complainant, “You are very well spoken”; based on race (White) and color (brown) when the SARC stated, “…sometimes when you are assigned taskers, you tend to milk them”; the SARC stated, “You must not want to go home because I don’t see anybody cleaning”; the SARC did not award Complainant a 40-hour time-off Civilian Performance Award similar to her coworkers; and based on disability (degenerative arthritis of the spine) when the SARC discontinued the fitness program. At the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of her right to request a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge or a final decision from the Agency. When Complainant did not request a hearing within the time frame provided in 29 C.F.R. § 1614.108(f), the Agency issued a final decision pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.110(b). The Agency found that the SARC articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for her actions. Specifically, for the claim that Complainant was not awarded the same 40-hour time-off Civilian Performance Award as her coworkers, the SARC explained that Complainant’s performance level was not similar to her coworkers. The SARC stated that Complainant struggled to meet deadlines, had difficulty showing up to work on time, and made no improvement after numerous conversations regarding punctuality. For the claim that the fitness program was discontinued, the SARC explained that this action was taken due to demand for training placing strain on the team’s schedule. The fitness program was an optional benefit instituted by the SARC and then discontinued for all employees when operational demands increased. The Agency found no evidence that the SARC’s reasoning for her actions was pretext for discrimination. Regarding harassment, the Agency found no evidence that any of the SARC’s alleged actions or comments were motivated by the alleged bases in the complaint. The decision concluded that Complainant did not prove that the Agency subjected her to discrimination as alleged. Complainant then filed the instant appeal. Neither Complainant nor the Agency submitted briefs on appeal. Upon review of the record, we agree with the Agency that the SARC articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for her actions, as stated in the Agency’s final decision.
3 2025003942 Complainant has not presented evidence to rebut the Agency’s reasoning or show that it was pretext for discrimination. Regarding harassment, we find no evidence that the Agency’s actions were motivated by Complainant’s alleged bases. Furthermore, the SARC’s comments were not sufficiently severe or pervasive to constitute actionable harassment. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency’s final decision finding no discrimination. 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.
4 2025003942 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 (S0124) 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 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.
5 2025003942 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 _________ Gul Chaudhry’s signature T. Gimbrere, Acting Director Office of Federal Sector September 22, 2026 Date
Vous vous demandez comment ce texte s’applique à votre situation ?
Consultation gratuite, sans engagement
Décrivez votre situation. Notre équipe vous recontactera par e-mail pour votre consultation.
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.