01A44611_r
01-05-2005
Sonjua C. Beasley, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.
Sonjua C. Beasley v. United States Postal Service
01A44611
January 5, 2005
.
Sonjua C. Beasley,
Complainant,
v.
John E. Potter,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service,
Agency.
Appeal No. 01A44611
Agency No. 4H-303-0206-02
Hearing No. 110-2003-08552X
DECISION
Complainant 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. For the following
reasons, the Commission AFFIRMS the agency's final order.
The record reveals that complainant, a Rural Carrier Associate<1> at
the agency's Annex of the Kennesaw Post Office facility, filed a formal
EEO complaint on August 31, 2002, alleging that the agency discriminated
against her on the basis of race (African-American) when:
(1) Complainant was subjected to a hostile work environment; and
Complainant was constructively discharged when she did not receive an
adequate number of hours of work.
At the conclusion of the investigation, complainant received a copy of the
investigative report and requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative
Judge (AJ). Following a hearing, the AJ issued a decision finding no
discrimination.
The AJ concluded that complainant failed to establish a prima facie
case of disparate treatment because while complainant identified
two employees, not in complainant's protected class, who, arguably,
received better treatment in terms of the number of hours to which they
were assigned, she failed to consider several other employees in the
same position and in the same protected class as complainant, who also
received preferential treatment. The AJ identified two other Temporary
Relief Carriers, of complainant's race, who both worked consistently more
hours than complainant did. Moreover, the AJ found that the management
official responsible for scheduling both Temporary Relief Carriers and
Rural Carrier Associates was also in complainant's racial classification.
The AJ further concluded that the agency articulated legitimate,
nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions. The AJ found that the agency
assigned hours to its temporary employees as needed, and that when the
volume of mail decreased, the hours assigned to the relief carriers
was correspondingly reduced. The AJ found that complainant presented no
evidence the agency's reason for reducing the number of hours she worked
was a pretext for discrimination.
With respect to complainant's claim that she was subjected to a hostile
work environment, the AJ found complainant's testimony not credible
that comments from an agency official referring to �those people� were
directed to complainant based on her race. Accordingly, the AJ found
that no discrimination occurred. The agency's final order implemented
the AJ's decision.
Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405(a), all post-hearing factual findings by
an AJ will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence in the record.
Substantial evidence is defined as �such relevant evidence as a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.� Universal
Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 340 U.S. 474, 477 (1951)
(citation omitted). A finding regarding whether or not discriminatory
intent existed is a factual finding. See Pullman-Standard Co. v. Swint,
456 U.S. 273, 293 (1982). An AJ's conclusions of law are subject to a
de novo standard of review, whether or not a hearing was held.
After a careful review of the record, the Commission finds that the AJ's
findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence in the record
and that the AJ's decision properly summarized the relevant facts and
referenced the appropriate regulations, policies, and laws. We note
that complainant failed to present evidence that any of the agency's
actions were in retaliation for complainant's prior EEO activity or were
motivated by discriminatory animus toward complainant's race. We discern
no basis to disturb the AJ's decision. Therefore, after a careful review
of the record, including complainant's contentions on appeal, the agency's
response, and arguments and evidence not specifically addressed in this
decision, we AFFIRM the agency's final order fully implementing the AJ's
decision finding no discrimination.
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
January 5, 2005
__________________
Date
1We note that complainant was initially hired as a Temporary Relief
Carrier (TRC) and at some point, her appointment was converted to a
Rural Carrier Associate (RCA) position.