EEOC holds filing a formal amendment of EEO not necessary. Complainant filed an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaint alleging discrimination on the bases of race (Caucasian) and sex (female). The EEO stemmed from when, a Letter of Warning was not expunged, she was issued two different suspensions, she was issued a second Letter of Warning, and was ultimately removed. Following the filing of the Complaint, the Agency issued a Partial Acceptance/Partial Dismissal of the complaint for untimely EEO Counselor contact. During the EEO investigation, Complainant alleged for the first time that her termination was based on her disability (acute bronchitis) and the disability of her daughter (seizure disorder). Following the EEO investigation Complainant requested a hearing, and the Agency filed a motion for Summary Judgment that was ultimately granted. The Administrative Judge (AJ) held that assuming the new claims were like or related to her original claims of race and sex discrimination, Complainant did not follow the proper procedure to amend her complaint. With regard to her claims of race and sex discrimination, the AJ found that Complainant failed to show that the Agency’s stated reason for firing Complainant, her record of poor attendance, was a pretext for discrimination based on race or sex. Complainant appealed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) .

On appeal the EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations (OFO) held that although Complainant did not go through the proper procedure to amend a complaint, it was reasonable for her to assume that the claims were continuing based on the investigator’s actions of requesting supplemental information about the claims. The OFO ultimately held that although Complainant was denied the opportunity to properly amend her complaint, there were still no genuine issues of material fact in dispute as Complainant failed to provide any evidence that management was aware of her or her daughter’s disability. The OFO affirmed the Agency’s final action holding summary judgment was appropriate.

Michelle Rehder v. United States Postal Service, EEO Appeal No. 0120091221 (January 14, 2011)