Opinion ID: 796224
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The NTEU Grievance Process and Fernandez's EEO Complaint

Text: 11 On September 7, 2001, Larry Tanacredi, president of the local chapter of the NTEU representing employees in the Customs Service, filed a grievance on behalf of Fernandez challenging the Department's decision to deny reinstatement and requesting a meeting to discuss dispute resolution. The collective bargaining agreement between the Department and the NTEU in place at that time permitted allegations of discrimination to be raised through the negotiated grievance process. Following delays in convening the meeting due to the events of September 11, 2001, the NTEU reiterated its demand for a dispute resolution meeting to address Fernandez's claim. 12 On October 22, 2001, an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Counselor in the Department was notified by NTEU that a grievance had been filed on Fernandez's behalf. Two days later, Fernandez was advised that he could not seek relief from the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Counselor because he had elected to resolve his complaint through the grievance process: the filing of the NTEU grievance indicates that [Fernandez] has elected to pursue this matter via non-EEO process, and [t]he same issue cannot be pursued through the EEO process. He was also advised that if he were dissatisfied with the result of the grievance proceeding, he could contact an EEO Counselor within 45 days of completion of gr[ie]vance process (final action). Despite this notice, on October 31, 2001, Fernandez contacted an EEO Counselor and filed an informal complaint alleging retaliation in connection with the Department's refusal to reinstate him. Fernandez then filed a formal EEO complaint on 5 November 15, 2001. The formal complaint was dismissed by letter on December 13, 2001. The letter advised Fernandez that his complaint of discrimination was being dismissed because the matter was raised in a negotiated grievance procedure that permits allegations of discrimination. Significantly, the letter also indicated that [t]he final decision on the grievance may be appealed to the EEOC. 13 On August 22, 2002, the NTEU, pursuing the dispute resolution process, invoked arbitration of Fernandez's grievance. On January 6, 2003, Fernandez authorized the appointment of NTEU Assistant Counsel Ralph Talarico as his representative. In December 2003, the Department offered to settle Fernandez's grievance by, among other things, placing him in a CEO position at John F. Kennedy International Airport, along with a promotion to GS-11. The NTEU, through Talarico, advised Fernandez to accept the offer or it would withdraw the grievance from arbitration. Dissatisfied with the terms of the proposed settlement, however, Fernandez refused to sign the agreement, which he believed to be a trap door to termination by the Department. On March 24, 2004, the NTEU withdrew the grievance from arbitration. Fernandez contends that he was not permitted to participate in the arbitration process. 14 Shortly thereafter, Fernandez contacted the EEOC to seek a right-to-sue letter, but his efforts were unsuccessful. Fernandez filed the instant Complaint on May 5, 2004. The form Complaint provided to Fernandez indicated that [t]his action is brought for discrimination in employment pursuant to . . . Title VII and noted that [i]n order to bring a suit in federal district court under Title VII, you must first obtain a right to sue letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In a letter to the District Court accompanying the Complaint, Fernandez advised that he returned to the EEOC in New York to request an updated right to su[e] letter, as I was told by the pro se office[,] but the EEOC said that I did[ not] need it.