01970596
11-20-1998
Althea A. Roberson, Appellant, v. Bruce Babbitt, Secretary, Department of the Interior, Agency.
Althea A. Roberson v. Department of the Interior
01970596
November 20, 1998
Althea A. Roberson, )
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 01970596
) Agency No. FNP-94-059
) Hearing No. 370-95-2833X
Bruce Babbitt, )
Secretary, )
Department of the Interior, )
Agency. )
______________________________)
DECISION
INTRODUCTION
On October 26, 1996, Althea A. Roberson (appellant) filed an appeal to
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the Commission or the EEOC)
from a final decision of the Secretary, Department of the Interior. The
final decision concerns appellant's Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO)
complaint, alleging discrimination based on race (African-American), color
(Black), and gender (female) in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq. The agency failed
to establish the date on which appellant received the final decision.
Therefore, the appeal is accepted by the Commission in accordance with
the provisions of EEOC Order No. 960.001.
ISSUE PRESENTED
Whether appellant was discriminated against on the bases stated above
when, on December 13, 1993, January 4, 1994, and January 12, 1994, she
was subjected to harassment when her supervisor (S-1) spoke to her in
an angry and negative manner.
CONTENTIONS ON APPEAL
Appellant submits contentions on appeal which have been reviewed and
considered by the Commission.
BACKGROUND
Appellant filed this formal EEO complaint on February 16, 1994,
alleging discrimination as set forth in the above-entitled statement,
"Issue Presented." Following an investigation of this complaint,
the agency informed appellant that she could request either an EEOC
administrative hearing or a final agency decision (FAD) based on the
existing record. Appellant requested an EEOC hearing, which was held on
March 12, 1995. On August 12, 1996, the EEOC administrative judge (AJ)
issued a recommended bench decision (RD), which found no discrimination.
On September 19, 1996, the agency issued its FAD, which adopted the
findings of the AJ. Appellant now appeals the FAD.
The AJ found that appellant was harassed, at least with respect to the
incidents in which S-1 yelled at her. However, the AJ concluded that
the harassment was not because of illegal discrimination but because
of appellant's conduct. The AJ found that S-1's characterization of
appellant's conduct was supported by the record. Specifically, the AJ
concluded that appellant's conduct had been insubordinate in the manner
described by S-1. The AJ noted that appellant had experienced problems
with supervisors both prior to and after the problems she experienced
with S-1. These problems had arisen from appellant's abuse of leave,
her misuse of a government vehicle, and her failure to report to work
without approved leave.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
The Commission has reviewed the record, consisting of the investigative
report and exhibits, the hearing transcript, the RD, the FAD, and the
contentions on appeal. The Commission concludes that the AJ thoroughly
and accurately set forth the facts giving rise to the complaint and
the law applicable to the case. There is, therefore, no need to
restate the facts and law herein. The Commission further concludes
that the AJ correctly determined that appellant had not established, by
a preponderance of the evidence, that the agency discriminated against
her as alleged in her complaint. Accordingly, the Commission herein
adopts the AJ's recommended findings of fact and conclusions of law.
CONCLUSION
Therefore, based on a thorough review of the record, and for the foregoing
reasons, it is the decision of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
to AFFIRM the agency's final decision and find that appellant has failed
to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she was discriminated
against as alleged.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M0795)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this
case if the appellant or the agency submits a written request containing
arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:
1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available
when the previous decision was issued; or
2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,
regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or
3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial
precedential implications.
Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST
BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this
decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive
a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in
opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider
MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party
WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request
to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.407. All requests and arguments
must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received
by the Commission.
Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your
request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances
have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,
a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the
delay and 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).
RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0993)
It is the position of the Commission that 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.
You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have
interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that
a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the
date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action
is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)
CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult
an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction
in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)
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:
Nov 20, 1998
______________ ________________________________
DATE Ronnie Blumenthal, Director
Office of Federal Operations