Complainant had originally filed five separate complaints of
discrimination that had been consolidated for a single hearing. Each of
these complaints concerned various incidents that took place between
1994 and 1996. The only issue on which discrimination was found was the
scheduling of a fitness-for-duty examination on July 8, 1996. On January
29, 1996, complainant had reported finding a hangman’s noose in the
container repair room at the facility in question. She also reported
that she had found a letter with the word, “bomb.” The supervisor
thought that she was acting paranoid, and, after consulting with the
supervisor-in-charge, decided to send her for a fitness-for-duty exam.
The AJ found that this was sufficient to establish liability on the
basis of perceived disability. The AJ found that the supervisor’s
statement reflecting his perception of complainant’s mental state was
direct evidence of disability discrimination. Bench Decision, p. 24
Carolyn M. Honore v. United States Postal Service
01A20869
03-04-03
.
Carolyn M. Honore,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A20869
Agency No. 1G-708-1042-96
Hearing No. 270-98-9115X
DECISION
Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405, the Commission accepts the complainant’s
appeal from the agency’s final order in the above-entitled matter.
Complainant challenged the agency’s decision to award her $2,015.10 in
compensatory damages, pursuant to the Commission’s order in Carolyn
Honore v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal
Service, EEOC Appeal No. 01A10477 (June 21, 2001). In that decision,
the Commission found that the agency had discriminated against her on
the bases of gender and perceived disability (perceived paranoia), by
scheduling her for a fitness for duty examination after she reported
two incidents to management.
The Commission ordered the agency to conduct eight hours of training
for the responsible management official, post notice, and conduct
a supplemental investigation on the issue of compensatory damages.
The agency’s compliance report, dated October 3, 2001, indicates that the
supervisor in question was given training on August 20, 2001. The plant
manager of the facility where the discriminatory act took place posted
the required notice on that same date. On October 15, 2001, the agency
determined that it was liable for damages in the amount of $2,015.10,
of which $1,000 represented nonpecuniary losses, $727.10 represented
past pecuniary losses, and $288 represented future pecuniary losses.
In her appeal, complainant contends that the amount offered by the agency
was inadequate.
Section 102(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 authorizes the Commission
to award compensatory damages as part of make-whole relief for intentional
discrimination. 42 U.S.C. § 1981a; West v. Gibson, 527 U.S. 212,
217 (1999). To receive an award of compensatory damages, complainant
must demonstrate that she has been harmed as a result of the agency’s
discriminatory actions, and must also establish the extent, nature,
severity, and duration of that harm. Compensatory and Punitive Damages
Available Under Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, EEOC Notice
No. 915.002 (July 14, 1992), at 8, 11-12, 14. Evidence establishing the
necessary causal connection may include statements from complainant and
others, including family members, friends, and health care providers,
concerning any pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses incurred as a result
of the acts at issue in the various complaints. See generally Carle
v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 01922369 (Jan. 5, 1993).
Complainant had originally filed five separate complaints of
discrimination that had been consolidated for a single hearing. Each of
these complaints concerned various incidents that took place between
1994 and 1996. The only issue on which discrimination was found was the
scheduling of a fitness-for-duty examination on July 8, 1996. On January
29, 1996, complainant had reported finding a hangman’s noose in the
container repair room at the facility in question. She also reported
that she had found a letter with the word, “bomb.” The supervisor
thought that she was acting paranoid, and, after consulting with the
supervisor-in-charge, decided to send her for a fitness-for-duty exam.
The AJ found that this was sufficient to establish liability on the
basis of perceived disability. The AJ found that the supervisor’s
statement reflecting his perception of complainant’s mental state was
direct evidence of disability discrimination. Bench Decision, p. 24.
In support of her claim for $100,000 in compensatory damages,
complainant stated that she was suffering because her supervisors
took the position that she was crazy or insane when she reported the
incidents. In addition, complainant submitted several reports from a
psychiatrist who treated her. In a report dated October 2, 2001, Dr. AS
indicated that complainant was diagnosed with major depression with
mood congruent psychosis, and that complainant was permanently disabled,
to the extent that she could no longer work in any job. Appeal Exhibit
(AE) 1. In another report, dated September 27, 2001, Dr. AS stated:
Her depression has intensified with the job where she is. It is extremely
stressful for her to function and over the years the relationship
with the staff and the superiors has deteriorated. Both factors being
her depression and her superior’s relationship issues with her at the
present time has made it difficult for her to function. . . . I am going
to make a strong recommendation to her that she not go to work and to
ask for medical disability as she is completely functionally impaired.
She has been working impaired at least as long as I have know her for
the past six years and possibly for many years prior to that. I know
the work situation deteriorates her emotional status . . .
AE 2, 4. Dr. AS proscribed various medications, including Effexor,
Seroquel, Paxil, and Prosac. AE 2, 3. In a report dated May 24,
2001, Dr. AS stated that complainant’s job had been a major source of
conflict that had gotten worse over the years. AE 3. On the basis of
this evidence, the agency determined that an award of $2,015.10 was
appropriate. Complainant has not presented any evidence that would
support a higher award.
After a review of the record in its entirety, including consideration
of all statements submitted on appeal, it is the decision of the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission to affirm the agency’s final decision
awarding $2,015.10 in compensatory damages to complainant.
ORDER
Unless it has already done so, the agency shall issue a check to
complainant in the amount of $2,015.10. The agency is further directed
to submit a report of compliance, as provided in the statement entitled
“Implementation of the Commission’s Decision.” The report shall include
supporting documentation verifying that the corrective action has been
implemented.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION’S DECISION (K0501)
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 complainant. 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).
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.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS – ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0701)
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), 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 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 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 (R0900)
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 within ninety (90) calendar days from the date
that you receive this decision. 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 (Z1199)
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:
______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
___03-04-03_______________
Date
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision
was received within five (5) calendar days after it was mailed. I certify
that this decision was mailed to complainant, complainant’s representative
(if applicable), and the agency on:
__________________
Date
______________________________
Equal Opportunity Assistant
