Dorothy T. Pleasant, Petitioner,v.Alphonso Jackson, Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 17, 2005
03a50064 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 17, 2005)

03a50064

08-17-2005

Dorothy T. Pleasant, Petitioner, v. Alphonso Jackson, Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Agency.


Dorothy T. Pleasant v. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development

03A50064

August 17, 2005

.

Dorothy T. Pleasant,

Petitioner,

v.

Alphonso Jackson,

Secretary,

Department of Housing and Urban Development,

Agency.

Petition No. 03A50064

MSPB No. CB-7121-04-0010-V-1

DECISION

Petitioner filed a timely petition with the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission asking for review of an Opinion and Order issued by the Merit

Systems Protection Board (MSPB) concerning her 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., Section 501 of the Rehabilitation

Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq. and

the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended,

29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq.

Petitioner, a Public Housing Revitalization Specialist, GS-12, alleged

that she was discriminated against on the bases of race (Black),

color (Black), sex (female), disability (numerous conditions) and age

(66) when she was removed from her position.<1> The agency removed

petitioner for misrepresenting a claim with the Office of Worker's

Compensation, disrespectful conduct, failure to comply or delay in

following instructions, and making false and malicious/unfounded

statements against agency employees. Petitioner grieved her removal,

but did not raise any discrimination claims with the arbitrator. The

arbitrator found that the agency could not sustain all of the reasons

for removing petitioner. The arbitrator found that the only claim that

could be sustained was one claim related to petitioner's failure to

comply with instructions. Specifically, petitioner was directed to seek

prior approval for official time for representative duties. Although

petitioner had been warned of the consequences, she did not seek prior

approval for such leave. The arbitrator reduced the termination to a 30

day suspension. Petitioner sought review of the arbitrator's decision

by the MSPB. Therein petitioner raised her claims of discrimination.

However, as noted by the Administrative Judge, petitioner did not

provide any evidence to support her claims of discrimination, and did not

establish a prima facie case of discrimination on any basis. The Board's

Opinion and Order upheld the 30 day suspension, found that there was

no discrimination, and gave appeal rights to the Commission. Petitioner

then filed a petition for review with the Commission.

EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission has jurisdiction

over 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 Opinion and Order 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 (W0900)

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 (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

August 17, 2005

__________________

Date

1The Commission assumes, without finding, that petitioner is an individual

with a disability. See 29 C.F.R. � 1630.2(g)(1).