01a52484
03-21-2006
John E. Norton, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
John E. Norton v. United States Postal Service
01A52484
March 21, 2006
.
John E. Norton,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A52484
Agency No. 4A-100-0065-03
DECISION
Complainant appeals to the Commission from the agency's December 20, 2004
decision finding no discrimination. Complainant alleges discrimination
on the bases of race (White), color (white), sex (male), and age (date
of birth: February 25, 1952), when:
1. On December 5, 2002, complainant received a Letter of Warning.
2. On March 4, 2003, complainant was notified that he was going to
be transferred.
3. On an unspecified date, complainant was subjected to inappropriate
comments by his manager.
The agency previously dismissed claim 3 for failure to state a claim. The
Commission affirmed the dismissal of claim 3 in EEOC Appeal No. 01A42118
(July 21, 2004). Therefore, we shall only consider claims 1 and 2 in
this decision. The agency found no discrimination in claims 1 and 2.
The agency asserted that the Letter of Warning was issued because
complainant failed to follow instructions. The Letter of Warning states
that although complainant was instructed to eliminate the use of letter
carriers on a higher level, complainant used Carrier A on a higher
level on November 9, 2002 and November 11, 2002. The Commission finds
that the agency has articulated a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason
for issuing the Letter of Warning. Complainant has not shown that the
agency's explanation is unworthy of belief or that similarly situated
individuals were treated differently. Furthermore, complainant has not
shown by a preponderance of the evidence that the Letter of Warning was
issued for discriminatory reasons. Therefore, we find that complainant
has not shown that he was discriminated against as alleged in claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, the Manager, Post Office Operations stated that
complainant was �temporarily assigned [by the Manager] to Grand Central
Station to provide stability and to implement the results of the recently
completed Formal Mail Count & Route Inspection.� The Manager further
explained that he temporarily assigned complainant for the following
reasons: �Due to a Station Manager vacancy at Grand Central and the
complainant's years of experience and my knowledge of his ability to
get things done through people, I decided that he could be successful in
this endeavor.� The Manager further stated that he temporarily assigned
other persons for similar reasons. The Commission finds that the agency
has articulated a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for temporarily
assigning complainant to Grand Central Station. Complainant has not shown
that the agency's explanation is unworthy of belief or that similarly
situated individuals were treated differently. Furthermore, complainant
has not shown by a preponderance of the evidence that the assignment
was made for discriminatory reasons. Therefore, we find that complainant
has not shown that he was discriminated against as alleged in claim 2.
The agency's decision finding no discrimination is AFFIRMED.
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
March 21, 2006
__________________
Date