01a03524
01-11-2001
Jacqueline Fridia, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Jacqueline Fridia v. United States Postal Service
01A03524
01-11-01
.
Jacqueline Fridia,
Complainant,
v.
William J. Henderson,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A03524
Agency No. 4D-280-0049-99
Hearing No. 140-99-8242X
DECISION
On April 10, 2000, Jacqueline Fridia (hereinafter referred to
as complainant) filed a timely appeal from the March 29, 2000, final
decision of the United States Postal Service (hereinafter referred to as
the agency) 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., and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended,
29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c). The appeal is timely filed (see 29 C.F.R. �
1614.402(a))<1> and is accepted in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405.
For the reasons that follow, the agency's decision is VACATED.
The issue presented in this appeal is whether the Administrative Judge
properly determined that no genuine issue of fact existed and issued a
decision without a hearing.
Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging that the agency
discriminated against her on the bases of race (black) and disability
(heart problems) when she was not hired by the agency as a Rural Carrier
Associate (RCA) in Fayetteville, North Carolina. The agency advised
complainant by letter that it declined to hire her due to her previous
work record with the agency in New York where she was removed for several
performance and conduct-related matters. Complainant averred that an
agency representative initially informed her by telephone that she was
not hired because of her disability.
Following an investigation, complainant requested a hearing.
The Administrative Judge (AJ) granted the agency's motion to issue a
decision without a hearing. In her decision, the AJ found that the
agency presented credible evidence that its failure to hire complainant
was based on her prior work history at another agency facility and that
complainant offered no argument or evidence that the agency's reasons were
not true or based on prohibited considerations of race and disability.
The Commission's regulations allow an AJ to issue a decision without
a hearing when s/he finds that there is no genuine issue of material
fact. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.109(g). This regulation is patterned after
the summary judgment procedure set forth in Rule 56 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure. Summary judgment is appropriate where
the trier of fact determines that, given applicable substantive law,
no genuine issue of material fact exists. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby,
Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 255 (1986). An issue is "genuine" if the evidence
is such that a reasonable fact-finder could find in favor of the
non-moving party. Oliver v. Digital Equip. Corp., 846 F.2d 103,
105 (1st Cir. 1988). With regard to EEOC administrative proceedings,
summary judgment is appropriate if, after an adequate investigation,
the fact-finder determines that complainant has failed to establish the
essential elements of his/her case. See Spangle v. Valley Forge Sewer
Authority, 839 F.2d 171, 173 (3d Cir. 1988). In determining whether to
grant summary judgment, the AJ's function is not to weigh the evidence
and render a determination as to the truth of the matter but only to
determine whether there exists a genuine factual dispute. Anderson,
After review of the matter before us, we find that the AJ erred in
granting summary judgment, because at least one significant issue of fact
remains in dispute. Complainant's assertion that an agency representative
informed her that she was not hired because of her disability presents
a response to the agency's articulation, the truth of which cannot be
determined on the record.<2> We find that complainant's claim, which
requires an assessment as to the credibility of complainant and agency
employees, presents a material issue of fact that requires a hearing.
For this reason, the AJ's issuance of a decision without a hearing was
improper, and this matter is remanded for a hearing.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, the agency's decision is vacated, and this matter is remanded
to the appropriate hearings unit for a hearing. The agency is directed
to comply with the Order, below.
ORDER
The above complaint is remanded to the EEOC's Raleigh Area Office
for scheduling of a hearing in an expeditious manner. The agency is
directed to submit a copy of the complaint file to the Hearings Unit
of the Raleigh Area Office within fifteen (15) calendar days of the
date this decision becomes final. The agency shall provide written
notification to the Compliance Officer at the address set forth below
that the complaint file has been transmitted to the Hearings Unit.
Thereafter, the Administrative Judge shall issue a decision on the
complaint in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.109, and the agency shall
issue a final action in accordance with 29 C.F.R. � 1614.110.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K0900)
Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory.
The agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30)
calendar days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The
report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal
Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,
Washington, D.C. 20036. The agency's report must contain supporting
documentation, and the agency must send a copy of all submissions to
the complainant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's
order, the complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement of
the order. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(a). The complainant also has the right
to file a civil action to enforce compliance with the Commission's order
prior to or following an administrative petition for enforcement. See 29
C.F.R. �� 1614.407, 1614.408, and 29 C.F.R. � 1614.503(g). Alternatively,
the complainant has the right to file a civil action on the underlying
complaint in accordance with the paragraph below entitled "Right to File
A Civil Action." 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.407 and 1614.408. A civil action
for enforcement or a civil action on the underlying complaint is subject
to the deadline stated in 42 U.S.C. � 2000e-16(c)(Supp. V 1993). If the
complainant files a civil action, the administrative processing of the
complaint, including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated.
See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.409.
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
(R0900)
This is a decision requiring the agency to continue its administrative
processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil
action, you have the right to file such action in an appropriate United
States District Court within ninety (90) calendar days from the date
that you receive this decision. In the alternative, you may file a
civil action after one hundred and eighty (180) calendar days of the date
you filed your complaint with the agency, or filed your appeal with the
Commission. 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. 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 Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
__01-11-01________
Date
1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's federal
sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations apply
to all federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in the
administrative process. Consequently, the Commission will apply the
revised regulations found at 29 C.F.R. Part 1614, where applicable,
in deciding the present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also
be found at the Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.
2The hearing process is intended to be an extension of the investigative
process in order to "ensur[e] that the parties have a fair and reasonable
opportunity to explain and supplement the record and to examine and
cross-examine witnesses." See EEOC Management Directive 110 (November 9,
1999), Chapter 6, page 6-l; see also 29 C.F.R. �� 1614.109(c)-(d); Bang
v. USPS, EEOC Appeal No. 01961575 (March 26, 1998) ("Truncation of this
process, while material facts are still in dispute and the credibility of
witnesses is still ripe for challenge, improperly deprives complainant of
a full and fair investigation of her claims.") see also Peavley v. USPS,
EEOC Request No. 05950628 (October 31, 1996); Chronister v. USPS, EEOC
Request No. 05940578 (April 23, 1995).