[Redacted], Coraline C., 1 Complainant,v.Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Field Areas and Regions), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Mar 28, 2022

Appeal No. 2022000301 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 28, 2022)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Coraline C.,1 Complainant, v. Louis DeJoy, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Field Areas and Regions), Agency. Appeal No. 2022000301 Hearing No. 410-2020-00508X Agency No. 4K-290-0010-20 DECISION Complainant filed an appeal, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403, from the Agency’s October 14, 2021 final order concerning an equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint alleging 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., Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq., and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant was employed by the Agency as a Part-Time Flexible, Sales, Services and Distribution Associate, P-06, Customer Service, at its Johns Island Post Office in Johns Island, South Carolina. On February 3, 2020, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging discriminatory harassment by the Agency based on race (Black), age (over 40), and disability (U.S. Army Warrior) when in support of her harassment allegation she alleged beginning in July 2019, and continuing, the following has occurred: 1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant’s name when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission’s website. 2022000301 2 1. She was sent home and her work hours were given to White rural carriers; 2. Her request(s) for leave (personal reason) were denied; 3. She was not allowed to dress out of uniform like her coworkers; 4. She was continually given the least desirable work assignments; 5. She was not allowed to train the rural carriers to work the window operations; 6. She was not provided uniform allowance or a shirt until she received the uniform allowance; 7. On or about September 10, 2019, through September 17, 2019, her requests for sick leave were denied and on or about October 8, 2019, through January 2, 2020, and continuing her requests for wounded warrior leave2 were denied and she was charged Absent Without Official Leave (AWOL); and 8. On November 19, 2019, through January 7, 2020, her request for work accommodations was not granted and she was not allowed to return to work. After its investigation into the complaint, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of right to request a hearing before an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) Administrative Judge (AJ). Complainant requested a hearing. The Agency submitted a motion for a decision without a hearing. Complainant did not submit any opposition to the Agency’s motion. The AJ subsequently issued a decision by summary judgment in favor of the Agency. The AJ found that Complainant failed to present any evidence of discrimination or harassment as alleged. The record indicates that Complainant resigned from her employment at the Agency effective January 20, 2021. This is not at issue. Regarding claims 1 and 5, Complainant clarified that she was not sent home and she never wanted to train rural carriers. Regarding claim 2, the Agency indicated that Complainant’s leave requests for personal reasons on July 31 - August 2, 2019, and September 19, 2019, were denied for the needs of the service. The record shows that during this time period, the office was extremely short staffed and was borrowing employees from other post offices. Complainant has not argued that this was not the situation regarding being short staffed. We find no evidence showing that similarly situated persons were treated more favorably than Complainant regarding leave requests during this time period. Regarding claim 3, management indicated that all retail window clerks, including Complainant, were required to be in uniform. Regarding claim 4, management stated that all clerks, including Complainant, were assigned to perform the same assignment (i.e., Amazon parcels, PO Box parcels, and drop shipment parcels) and there were no less or more desirable assignments. 2 Wounded warrior leave appears to be leave related to military service that is separate from other categories of leave. 2022000301 3 Regarding claim 6, Complainant’s Postmaster indicated that when she became aware that Complainant had no uniform, she submitted the request and provided Complainant with a shirt to wear while she was waiting on her uniform allowance. Employees, including Complainant, were told to wear solid blue or black pants and shirt while working the window until an allowance was granted. Complainant ultimately received a uniform allowance. Regarding claim 7, Complainant clarified that she was denied sick leave for September 13 - 17, 2019 (not September 10 - 17, 2019). Management indicated that they were not aware of Complainant’s leave request. There is no indication in the record of a leave request for the September leave having been submitted prior to those dates. For October 8, 2019 - January 2, 2020, management indicated that Complainant was initially charged AWOL because she failed to report to work and did not submit her documentation in a timely manner. Management also indicated that once Complainant submitted her documentation, a pay adjustment was processed, including her wounded warrior leave. Complainant indicated that she filed a grievance regarding the alleged AWOLs and was paid for her leave. Regarding claim 8, Complainant’s Postmaster indicated that Complainant had to wear a boot on her foot which prohibited her from working and she needed medical documentation from her doctor stating she could return to work, including her restrictions. Complainant subsequently provided the requested documentation and the Postmaster sent that documentation to the Occupational Nurse for clearance. Complainant was returned to work on January 8, 2020, with 20,000 steps per day restriction which was later revised to 10,000 steps per day. Complainant was granted the requested accommodation. Complainant is arguing, in this claim, that the Postmaster discriminatorily delayed approving a return date; however, the record clearly shows that the Postmaster was simply waiting for the Occupational Nurse to give the approval for a return date. Complainant does not claim that the Occupational Nurse acted discriminatorily or improperly in this claim. The Agency issued its final order adopting the AJ’s finding that Complainant failed to prove discrimination as alleged. The instant appeal followed. The Commission's regulations allow an AJ to grant summary judgment when he or she finds that there is no genuine issue of material fact. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.109(g). An issue of fact is “genuine” if the evidence is such that a reasonable fact finder could find in favor of the non- moving party. Celotex v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986); Oliver v. Digital Equip. Corp., 846 F.2d 103, 105 (1st Cir. 1988). A fact is “material” if it has the potential to affect the outcome of the case. In rendering this appellate decision, we must scrutinize the AJ’s legal and factual conclusions, and the Agency’s final order adopting them, de novo. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(a)(stating that a “decision on an appeal from an Agency’s final action shall be based on a de novo review…”); see also Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO-MD-110), at Chap. 9, § VI.B. (as revised, August 5, 2015)(providing that an administrative judge’s determination to issue a decision without a hearing, and the decision itself, will both be reviewed de novo). 2022000301 4 In order to successfully oppose a decision by summary judgment, a complainant must identify, with specificity, facts in dispute either within the record or by producing further supporting evidence and must further establish that such facts are material under applicable law. Such a dispute would indicate that a hearing is necessary to produce evidence to support a finding that the agency was motivated by discriminatory animus. Here, however, Complainant has failed to establish such a dispute. Even construing any inferences raised by the undisputed facts in favor of Complainant, a reasonable fact finder could not find in Complainant’s favor. Upon careful review of the AJ’s decision and the evidence of record, as well as the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude that the AJ correctly determined that the preponderance of the evidence did not establish that Complainant was discriminated against by the Agency as alleged. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the Agency’s final order adopting the AJ’s decision. STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL RECONSIDERATION (M0920) The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider this appellate decision if Complainant or the Agency submits a written request that contains arguments or evidence that 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 for reconsideration must be filed with EEOC’s Office of Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision. If the party requesting reconsideration elects to file a statement or brief in support of the request, that statement or brief must be filed together with the request for reconsideration. A party shall have twenty (20) calendar days from receipt of another party’s request for reconsideration within which to submit a brief or statement in opposition. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at Chap. 9 § VII.B (Aug. 5, 2015). Complainant should submit his or her request for reconsideration, and any statement or brief in support of his or her request, via the EEOC Public Portal, which can be found at https://publicportal.eeoc.gov/Portal/Login.aspx. Alternatively, Complainant can submit his or her request and arguments to the Director, Office of Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, via regular mail addressed to P.O. Box 77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail addressed to 131 M Street, NE, Washington, DC 20507. In the absence of a legible postmark, a complainant’s request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if OFO receives it by mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604. 2022000301 5 An agency’s request for reconsideration must be submitted in digital format via the EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). Either party’s request and/or statement or brief in opposition must also include proof of service on the other party, unless Complainant files his or her request via the EEOC Public Portal, in which case no proof of service is required. Failure to file within the 30-day time period will result in dismissal of the party’s request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation must be submitted together with the 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 (S0610) 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 (Z0815) If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant’s Right to File a Civil Action for the specific time limits). FOR THE COMMISSION: ______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden’s signature Carlton M. Hadden, Director Office of Federal Operations March 28, 2022 Date