01996335_r
11-14-2001
Araceli C. Wright, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Araceli C. Wright v. United States Postal Service
01996335
November 14, 2001
.
Araceli C. Wright,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01996335
Agency No. 4-G-730-0013-97
Hearing No. 310-99-5299X
DECISION
Complainant timely initiated an appeal from the agency's final decision
concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint of unlawful
employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq. The appeal
is accepted pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405. Complainant claims
that she was discriminated against on the bases of race (Hispanic),
national origin (Hispanic), and sex (female) when, on September 7,
1996, complainant received notification that her transitional employee
(TE) contract would not be renewed. For the reasons described below,
the Commission affirms the agency's final decision.
The record reveals that complainant, a TE letter carrier at the agency's
Westside Station facility, filed the instant formal EEO complaint with
the agency on or about December 19, 1996. At the conclusion of the
investigation, complainant received a copy of the investigative report
and requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ).
Following a hearing, the AJ issued a recommended decision finding
no discrimination. The AJ concluded that the agency articulated a
legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for failing to renew complainant's
TE contract, thereby meeting its burden of production. According to the
agency, pursuant to an agreement with the unions, including the union
to which complainant belonged, as the agency became more automated,
TEs were to be phased out and their contracts not renewed.
The AJ found that complainant did not establish by a preponderance of
the evidence that the agency's articulated reason was a pretext to mask
unlawful discrimination. In trying to establish
pretext, complainant attempted to show that her supervisor was biased
against her for discriminatory reasons and that other TEs were retained
after complainant was given notice that her contract would not be renewed.
In reaching the conclusion that complainant did not establish pretext,
the AJ found that complainant's supervisor gave her an outstanding final
evaluation and attempted to find complainant another job in the agency
after her TE contract was not renewed. Additionally, the AJ found that
complainant's supervisor had no influence over whether complainant or
the other TEs were retained.
The agency's final decision implemented the AJ's recommended decision.
On appeal, complainant contends that the AJ erred when he failed to
weigh and consider the evidence as presented at the hearing. Complainant
restates arguments previously made at the hearing, including her assertion
that the agency retained other TEs after complainant's TE contract was
not renewed. The agency submitted no brief or documents in response to
complainant's statement on appeal.
The Commission will uphold all post-hearing factual findings by an AJ
if supported by "substantial evidence" in the record. See 29 C.F.R. �
1614.405(a). Substantial evidence is defined as "such relevant evidence
as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion."
Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 340 U.S. 474,
477 (1951) (citation omitted). A finding regarding whether or not
discriminatory intent existed is a factual finding. See Pullman-Standard
Co. v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273, 293 (1982).
After a careful review of the record, the Commission finds that the
AJ's decision properly summarized the relevant facts and referenced the
appropriate regulations, policies, and laws. We find no basis to disturb
the AJ's decision. Complainant has failed to show by a preponderance
of the evidence that the agency's action was motivated by prohibited
discrimination.
Therefore, we AFFIRM the agency's final decision finding 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
November 14, 2001
__________________
Date