Betty A. Burke, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Western Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJun 25, 2007
0120063012 (E.E.O.C. Jun. 25, 2007)

0120063012

06-25-2007

Betty A. Burke, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Western Area), Agency.


Betty A. Burke,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

(Western Area),

Agency.

Appeal No. 01200630121

Agency No. 4E-990-0032-05

Hearing No. 380-2006-00065X

DECISION

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405, the Commission accepts complainant's

appeal for de novo review, from the agency's March 15, 2006 final

decision2 concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint

alleging 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.

Complainant, a former part-time flexible clerk at the Sandpoint, Ohio

Post Office, alleged that the agency discriminated against her on the

basis of reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when, on April 26,

2005, she was issued a notice of removal for exceeding her restrictions.

Complainant asserts that she engaged in prior EEO activity when on

November 18, 2004, she contacted the EEO office in order to complain about

a supervisor's improper actions, out-of-line remarks, and "crude" jokes.

There is no indication in the record that any of the supervisor's alleged

inappropriate conduct was related to any protected basis, such as sex,

race, age, etc. Here however, we have assumed arguendo that complainant's

prior EEO activity arises under Title VII, and that she established a

prima facie case of retaliation. We note further, that complainant did

not allege disability as a basis of discrimination.

After a careful review of the record, including consideration of all

statements submitted on appeal,3 we AFFIRM the agency's final order.

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

June 25, 2007

__________________

Date

1 Due to a new data system, this case has been re-designated with the

above referenced appeal number.

2 Although complainant initially requested a hearing before an

Administrative Judge (AJ), on February 16, 2006, the AJ cancelled the

hearing and remanded the case to the agency for issuance of a final agency

decision, because of complainant's failure to respond to his Notice and

Order. We will not address this matter because, on appeal, complainant

has not specifically challenged the AJ's decision to cancel the hearing.

3 On appeal, complainant contends that on January 27, 2006, she

inadvertently sent certain additional evidence to an AJ in the Seattle

District Office. She asserts that such evidence was never returned

to her. We note that complainant does not indicate why this alleged

missing evidence was not contained in the report of investigation.

Further, she fails to indicate the nature of such evidence, or why it

would be pertinent to the issue presented in this case.

??

??

??

??

2

0120063012

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036