Maria De Lopez, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Pacific Region) Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSep 8, 2005
01a52915r (E.E.O.C. Sep. 8, 2005)

01a52915r

09-08-2005

Maria De Lopez, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Pacific Region) Agency.


Maria De Lopez v. United States Postal Service

01A52915

September 8, 2005

Maria De Lopez,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

(Pacific Region)

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A52915

Agency No. 1F-901-0137-03

Hearing No. 340-2004-00325X

DECISION

Complainant timely initiated an appeal from the agency's final order

concerning her equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint of unlawful

employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil

Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.

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

29 U.S.C. � 621 et seq. The appeal is accepted pursuant to 29 C.F.R. �

1614.405. For the following reasons, the Commission affirms the agency's

final order.

The record reveals that complainant, a Transitional Employee (TE) at the

agency's Los Angeles facility, filed a formal EEO complaint on March 8,

2005, alleging that the agency discriminated against her on the bases

of race (Hispanic), national origin (Mexican), sex (female), religion

(Catholic), color (Brown), and age (D.O.B. June 27, 1960) when she was

terminated from TE employment and was not offered casual employment.

At the conclusion of the investigation, complainant received a copy of the

investigative report and requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative

Judge (AJ). The AJ issued a decision without a hearing, adopting the

agency's factual findings and conclusions of law in the entirety.

After a careful review of the record, despite the fact that he AJ did no

independent legal analysis, the Commission finds that the issuance of a

decision without a hearing was appropriate. Construing the evidence to be

most favorable to complainant, we find that complainant failed to present

evidence that any of the agency's actions were motivated by discriminatory

animus toward complainant's protected classes. Complainant brought her

complaint under Title VII, which prohibits employment discrimination

based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, and the ADEA,

which prohibits age discrimination in employment; however, she does not

actually allege discrimination under either of these statutes. In fact,

complainant explicitly admitted that the agency's employment decision

was not motivated by her race, religion, sex, national origin, color,

or age. Deposition at 22 and 53. Rather, when asked on what basis she

was discriminated against, she stated, �Because I wasn't offered the job

to the other people. I was the only person that wasn't.� Deposition at 22.

Further, in her brief to the Commission, complainant states, �I conclude

strongly that I was discriminatory [sic] terminated and my EEO was not

about discrimination due to race, color, or age.� Complainant's Brief

in Support of Appeal at 2.

We cannot ascertain from the record why complainant filed the instant

complaint although in her response to the agency's motion for summary

judgment, it seems that complainant believed the agency failed to follow

standard operating procedures in regard to rehiring TEs. Absent evidence

of unlawful discrimination, the Commission has no authority to review

the agency's rehiring decisions. For these reasons, the Commission

AFFIRMS the agency's final order.

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

_September 8, 2005______________

Date