Algernon W. Tinsley, Petitioner,v.Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionApr 29, 2009
0320090048 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 29, 2009)

0320090048

04-29-2009

Algernon W. Tinsley, Petitioner, v. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner, Social Security Administration, Agency.


Algernon W. Tinsley,

Petitioner,

v.

Michael J. Astrue,

Commissioner,

Social Security Administration,

Agency.

Petition No. 0320090048

MSPB No. CB7521080010T1

DECISION

Petitioner filed a timely petition with the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission asking for review of a Final Order issued by the Merit

Systems Protection Board (MSPB) concerning his claim of discrimination

in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII),

as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq. and the Age Discrimination in

Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq.

Petitioner alleged that he was discriminated against on the bases of race

(African-American) and age (approximately 70) when he was suspended

for 30 days. Briefly, petitioner was an Administrative Law Judge with

the agency's Office of Disability Adjudication and Review in Huntingdon,

West Virginia. He was suspended for making false entries on agency time

and attendance rosters (SSA-30).

A hearing was held and thereafter an MSPB Administrative Judge (AJ)

issued an initial decision finding that the agency supported its position

and upholding the suspension. The Commission notes that petitioner did

not testify at the hearing and refused to be deposed, citing his Fifth

Amendment rights. Thus, the AJ relied on the record and witnesses called

by the agency whom he found credible. Although petitioner alleged that

a younger, white employee was treated differently than he, the AJ noted

that at the time there were problems with the other employee's time and

attendance, the regional chief judge did not have the authority to issue

discipline. Investigations and reports were done for both petitioner

and the employee, but the chief administrative judge could not impose

discipline, although he testified he would have disciplined the other

employee if he had the authority. Petitioner sought review by the

full Board which denied his petition. Petitioner then filed the instant

petition with the Commission. Petitioner did not make any arguments in

his petition.

EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission has jurisdiction over

mixed case appeals on which the MSPB has issued a decision that makes

determinations on allegations of discrimination. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.303

et seq. The Commission must determine whether the decision of the

MSPB with respect to the allegation of discrimination constitutes a

correct interpretation of any applicable law, rule, regulation or policy

directive, and is supported by the evidence in the record as a whole.

29 C.F.R. � 1614.305(c).

Based upon a thorough review of the record, it is the decision of

the Commission to concur with the final decision of the MSPB finding

no discrimination. The Commission finds that the MSPB's decision

constitutes a correct interpretation of the laws, rules, regulations,

and policies governing this matter and is supported by the evidence in

the record as a whole.

PETITIONER'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (W0408)

This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right of

administrative appeal from the Commission's decision. You have the right

to file a civil action in an appropriate United States District Court,

based on the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board, within

thirty (30) calendar days of 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.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1008)

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 from the Court that

the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also

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 with

the Court 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

April 29, 2009

__________________

Date

2

0320090048

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P.O. Box 77960

Washington, DC 20013

3

0320090048