Hugo Robinson, Complainant,v.Michael F. DiMario, Public Printer, Government Printing Office, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJul 13, 2001
01a10920 (E.E.O.C. Jul. 13, 2001)

01a10920

07-13-2001

Hugo Robinson, Complainant, v. Michael F. DiMario, Public Printer, Government Printing Office, Agency.


Hugo Robinson v. Government Printing Office

01A10920

July 13, 2001

.

Hugo Robinson,

Complainant,

v.

Michael F. DiMario,

Public Printer,

Government Printing Office,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A10920

Agency No. 98-03

Hearing No. 100-A0-7166X

DECISION

On November 13, 2000, Hugo Robinson (hereinafter referred to as

complainant) filed a timely appeal from the September 11, 2000, final

decision of the Government Printing Office (hereinafter referred to as the

agency) concerning his 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., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of

1967, as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq. The appeal is timely filed (see

29 C.F.R. � 1614.402(a)) and is accepted in accordance with 29 C.F.R. �

1614.405. For the reasons that follow, the agency's decision is AFFIRMED.

The issue presented in this appeal is whether the complainant has proven,

by a preponderance of the evidence, that the agency discriminated against

him on the bases of sex and age (48) when he was not selected for the

position of Computer Specialist, PG-12, in August 1997.

Complainant filed a formal complaint in December 1997. Following an

investigation, he requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge

(AJ). On September 7, 2000, the AJ issued a decision without a hearing

finding no discrimination, and the agency adopted the AJ's decision.

This appeal followed.<1>

Complainant, a Text Processing Operator, applied for the position of

Computer Specialist (two positions) but was not selected in favor of

two female candidates, ages 32 and 35. The selecting official (SO)

stated that he had worked for many years with all the candidates and was

familiar with them. He stated that he chose the selectees because they

had demonstrated accuracy and the ability to quickly grasp new concepts

and technologies, these being the most important factors in his decision,

which was necessary to address the rapid changes in the work environment.

Complainant contended that the SO had treated the selectees differently

and showed favoritism toward them by assigning them to train and work in

the WAIS room. The AJ addressed this contention and found that the record

and affidavits of witnesses did not support this argument, noting that

a training schedule for all staff allowed access to WAIS room duties.

Further, complainant's statement in the record indicated that he was

afforded training but found it confusing.

After an independent review of the record, including consideration of all

statements submitted on appeal, we find that the AJ accurately stated

the facts and correctly applied the pertinent principles of law and

that the decision is supported by substantial evidence in the record.

Complainant failed to demonstrate that the reasons articulated by the

agency, as stated by the SO, were not the true reasons or that the actions

of the agency were based on prohibited considerations of age or sex.

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, the agency's decision was proper and is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0900)

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

July 13, 2001

__________________

Date

1According to the AJ's decision, complainant supported summary judgment,

and he did not contest it on appeal.