01981780
11-25-1998
Brenda E. Jamison, Appellant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Headquarters), Agency
Brenda E. Jamison v. United States Postal Service
01981780
November 25, 1998
Brenda E. Jamison, ) Appeal No. 01981780
Appellant, ) Agency No. HI-0076-96
v. ) Hearing No. 100-97-7195X
William J. Henderson, )
Postmaster General, )
United States Postal Service, )
(Headquarters), )
Agency )
DECISION
Appellant timely appealed to this Commission from a final agency decision
("FAD") concerning her complaint of unlawful employment discrimination
in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42
U.S.C. �2000e et seq. The appeal is accepted pursuant to the provisions
of EEOC Order No. 960, as amended.
The issue presented is whether appellant was subjected to discrimination
on the bases of her sex and race (African American) when she was not
selected for the position of Postal Police Officer in Charge, EAS-15.
Appellant, a Sergeant in the Postal Police Force, EAS-14, was one of two
candidates for the position. The Inspector in Charge (male, African
American) instructed the Assistant Inspector in Charge (male, African
American) to rate and interview the candidates. Appellant received
more points than the other candidate in the rating process, but received
fewer points in the interview process. As a result, the other candidate
(male, African American) received an overall score which was higher by
two points. The other candidate ultimately was selected.
Appellant timely sought counseling and filed her instant formal EEO
complaint, which was accepted and processed by the agency. Appellant
requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge ("AJ") and,
on August 26, 1997, after a hearing, the AJ issued a recommended
decision ("RD") finding no discrimination. The AJ found that appellant
established a prima facie case of sex discrimination, but found that
she failed to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination as
the selectee also was African American. In addition, the AJ was not
persuaded that appellant established a prima facie case of race plus
sex discrimination, as there was no evidence that appellant's race when
coupled with her sex was a factor in her nonselection. The AJ found that
the agency had articulated legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for the
selection decision, which appellant failed to establish were pretextual.
For example, the AJ was not persuaded that the failure to convene a
selection panel violated agency policy or constituted pretext, in that
there were only two candidates for the position and the primary purpose
of such a panel is to reduce the number of candidates to be considered
by the selecting official. While appellant claimed that females were
underrepresented in supervisory positions, the record reflected that
the selecting official had selected an African American female in one
of his four prior selections.
In its FAD, the agency adopted the RD. Appellant timely appeals,
but presents no argument. After a careful review of the record, the
Commission finds that the RD adequately set forth the relevant facts and
analyzed the appropriate regulations, policies and laws. The Commission
discerns no basis to disturb the AJ's finding of no discrimination.
Therefore, the Commission AFFIRMS the FAD and finds that appellant fails
to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that she was subjected to
the discrimination 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 25, 1998
________________ ___________________________
DATE Ronnie Blumenthal, Director
Office of Federal Operations