Qihui Huang, Complainant,v.Michael K. Powell, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionFeb 15, 2001
01996274 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 15, 2001)

01996274

02-15-2001

Qihui Huang, Complainant, v. Michael K. Powell, Chairman, Federal Communications Commission, Agency.


Qihui Huang v. Federal Communications Commission

01996274

February 15, 2001

.

Qihui Huang,

Complainant,

v.

Michael K. Powell,

Chairman,

Federal Communications Commission,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01996274

Agency No. FCC-EEO-98-7

DECISION

Complainant timely initiated an appeal from a final agency decision (FAD)

concerning her complaint of unlawful employment discrimination of in

violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42

U.S.C. � 2000e et seq. (Title VII).<1> The appeal is accepted pursuant

to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405. Complainant alleged that she was subjected

to reprisal for filing a prior EEO complaint under Title VII when:

(1) her work responsibilities were reduced; (2) her opportunities for

promotion were diminished; and (3) she was denied official leave to attend

a Federal Asian Pacific American Council leadership training conference.

The record reveals that during the relevant time, complainant was employed

as a Computer Specialist, GS-13, at the agency's Information Technology

Center facility in Washington, D.C. Believing she was a victim of

discrimination, complainant sought EEO counseling and subsequently

filed a formal complaint on September 11, 1998. At the conclusion of

the investigation, complainant was informed of her right to request a

hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge or alternatively, to receive

a final decision by the agency. Complainant requested that the agency

issue a final decision.

In its FAD, the agency concluded that while complainant established a

prima facie case of reprisal,

she failed to establish that the reasons articulated by various management

officials for the actions in question were a pretext for reprisal.

Neither complainant nor the agency make any new contentions on appeal.

Applying the standards set forth in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411

U.S. 792 (1973); and Hochstadt v. Worcester Foundation for Experimental

Biology, Inc., 425 F. Supp. 318, 324 (D. Mass.), aff'd, 545 F.2d

222 (1st Cir. 1976) (applying McDonnell Douglas to reprisal cases),

the Commission agrees with the agency that complainant established a

prima facie case of reprisal inasmuch as the relevant agency officials

were aware of her prior EEO complaint filed in May 1997. However, the

Commission further finds that complainant failed to present evidence that

more likely than not, the agency's articulated reasons for its actions

were a pretext for reprisal. In reaching this conclusion, we note that

certain duties were removed from complainant's responsibility because

it had been determined that these duties required a full-time person,

that complainant had received the opportunity to perform on significant

projects, and that while complainant's first level supervisor recommended

that she be granted official leave to attend the conference, official

leave was denied based on complainant's technical position.

Therefore, after a careful review of the record, including arguments and

evidence not specifically addressed in this decision, we AFFIRM the FAD.

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

February 15, 2001

__________________

Date

1 On 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 in

deciding the present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be

found at the Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.