WASHINGTON FIELD OFFICE
-----------------------------------------------------
)
{YOUR NAME}, ) EEOC No. {YOUR
Complainant, ) Agency No. INFORMATION}
)
v. ) Administrative Judge:
)
Carlos M. Gutierrez, )
Secretary, )
U.S. Department of Commerce, )
Agency. )
) Date:
-----------------------------------------------------
COMPLAINANT’S
MOTION TO REMAND COMPLAINT TO AGENCY
EEO OFFICE TO HOLD CASE IN ABEYANCE
The Complainant hereby moves that her/his requested hearing be dismissed without
prejudice and remanded to the Agency to hold this matter in abeyance, until the Federal
District Court issues a decision regarding certification of the related class complaint,
Janet Howard et al. v. Carlos Gutierrez, Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce (U.S.
District Court, District of Columbia, No. 05-1968).
1. On October 5, 2005, Janet Howard and other current and former
employees of the Agency filed a class complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District
of Columbia. This class complaint alleges race discrimination and retaliation against a
class of all current and former African-American employees at the Agency concerning
promotional opportunities, job assignments, training, compensation,
bonuses,
evaluations, awards, other benefits or conditions of
employment, as well as retaliation
and a hostile work environment for African-American and
Caucasian employees.
To read the entire 58 page document, the link is:
http://www.nydclaw.com/finalcommerceclassactioncomplaint10-04-05.pdf
2. Complainant’s accepted bases and claims are well within the scope of the
class action complaint, particularly the italicized portions of No. 1, above. The bases on
which the complaint rests are race (African-American) and {INSERT WHATEVER
IS APPROPRIATE TO YOUR CASE}
3. As demonstrated in the class action complaint, Complainant raised similar
issues involving cash awards, performance appraisals and conditions or benefits of
employment.
4. EEOC Administrative Judge Joel Kravetz referred to a Commission decision
that claims need only be substantially similar, not identical, in order to be considered related
to the class complaint at issue. Accordingly, he ordered that the hearing request be dismissed
without prejudice and remanded to the Agency to hold the matter in abeyance. He also
stated that similar orders would be issued in other administrative EEO complaints affected by
the Howard class complaint. See April 25, 2006 Re: Janet Howard - Notice of Dismissal
Without Prejudice at http://www.feldf.com/Dismissal.pdf
To conclude, the Complainant requests that the instant case be dismissed without
prejudice and remanded to the Agency to hold in abeyance, until a decision issues
determining certification of the related class action complaint.
Respectfully submitted,
YOUR NAME YOUR ADDRESS
YOUR
PHONE/FAX
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION
WASHINGTON FIELD OFFICE
-----------------------------------------------------
)
YOUR NAME ) EEOC No. YOUR INFORMATION
Complainant, ) Agency No. )
v. ) Administrative Judge:
) Carlos M. Gutierrez, )
Secretary, )
U.S. Department of Commerce, )
Agency. )
)
-----------------------------------------------------
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that Complainant’s Motion to Remand the Complaint to the
Agency EEO Office to Hold the Case in Abeyance, pending decision regarding
certification in the related Howard class action complaint, is granted.
---------------------------- ---------------------------------------------
Date Administrative Judge
I, YOUR NAME, hereby certify that the Complainant’s Motion to Remand the Complaint to the Agency EEO Office to Hold the Case in Abeyance, was sent this date to the following:
Via
{INSERT METHOD OF DELIVERY e.g.
FAX / MAIL}
{INSERT
NAME OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE }
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Washington Field Office
{INSERT
ADDRESS/ROOM NUMBER}
Washington, DC 20705-1002
Via {INSERT METHOD OF DELIVERY e.g. FAX / MAIL}
{INSERT NAME OF AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE }
{INSERT
ADDRESS/ROOM NUMBER}
------------------------------- -----------------------------------------
Date Signature