0120072370
09-11-2007
Alfred Chircop, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Pacific Area), Agency.
Alfred Chircop,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
(Pacific Area),
Agency.
Appeal No. 0120072370
Hearing No. 550-2007-00057X
Agency No. 4F-000-0002-05
DECISION
On April 17, 2007, complainant filed an appeal from the agency's March
21, 2007, final order concerning his equal employment opportunity (EEO)
complaint alleging employment discrimination in violation of Section
501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended,
29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq. The appeal is deemed timely and is accepted for
the Commission's de novo review pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(a).
On August 23, 2005, complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that he
was discriminated against on the basis of reprisal for prior protected
EEO activity arising under the Rehabilitation Act when on May 10, 2005,
he became aware that an agency attorney had given his medical information
to an Injury Compensation Specialist and that the Injury Compensation
Specialist had sent his information to the Department of Labor, Office
of Workers Compensation Programs (OWCP), thereby violating his privacy
rights under the Rehabilitation Act.
The agency initially dismissed complainant's claim for failure to state
a claim under 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(1). Complainant appealed that
dismissal to the Commission, and in EEOC Appeal No. 01A60023 (August 9,
2006) we reversed the agency's dismissal and remanded the complaint
to the agency to conduct an investigation. At the conclusion of the
investigation, complainant was provided with a copy of the report of
investigation and notice of his right to request a hearing before an
EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant timely requested a hearing.
The AJ assigned to the case determined sua sponte that the complaint
did not warrant a hearing and on February 5, 2007, she issued a notice
to the parties to that effect, and requested responsive briefing.
On February 22, 2007, complainant submitted his objections, and argued
that the facts of his case necessitated a full hearing before the AJ.
On March 9, 2007, the agency submitted a response in which it expressed
its support for the AJ's conclusion that a decision could be issued on the
complaint without a hearing. The AJ issued a decision without a hearing
on March 12, 2007, in which she found that the agency had not violated
the confidentiality provisions of the Rehabilitation Act when it provided
otherwise confidential medical information to those individuals who have
the right and need to know the information, i.e., the Injury Compensation
Specialist and OWCP. The agency subsequently issued a final order on
March 21, 2007, adopting the AJ's finding that complainant failed to
prove that he was subjected to discrimination as alleged.
After a thorough review of the record, and the arguments submitted by
the parties on appeal, we find that the AJ's decision without a hearing
was appropriate, as no genuine issue of material fact is in dispute.
See Petty v. Department of Defense, EEOC Appeal No. 01A24206 (July 11,
2003); Murphy v. Department of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 01A04099 (July
11, 2003). We further find that the AJ's conclusion that complainant has
not shown that he was discriminated against based on his prior protected
EEO activity, and the agency's implementation of that decision, was
correct, and we AFFIRM the agency's finding of no discrimination.
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 (S0900)
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 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. 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.
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
9-11-07
__________________
Date
2
0120072370
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P. O. Box 19848
Washington, D.C. 20036
3
0120072370